maceria wrote: "Good afternoon sir, do you have any commercial merchandise to declare?"
"Yep, here's the invoices, the associated paperwork, and the associated requests for pre-approval."
For several years, they've been heading down to GenCon with a booth full of merchandise. One imagines that they've figure out how to fill out customs forms, and gotten any necessary advance rulings by now. Believe it or not, things like NAFTA are actually helpful.
maceria wrote: "Good afternoon sir, do you have any commercial merchandise to declare?"
"Yep, here's the invoices, the associated paperwork, and the associated requests for pre-approval."
For several years, they've been heading down to GenCon with a booth full of merchandise. One imagines that they've figure out how to fill out customs forms, and gotten any necessary advance rulings by now. Believe it or not, things like NAFTA are actually helpful.
Heh. Well, that's really not the first thing I think about when I hear the word "nafta" (bear in mind that in spanish it is one term to refer to gasoline) XD
What can I say besides "that's gonna be a cool cover" and "don't judge a book by its cover" ?
Yeah, but on the other other hand, we can ignore everything behind the cover if we have to. XD
I'm just surprised - and pleased - that he's involved at all. That was one of the biggest things I remember people talking about when the kickstarter was being put together and starting out. Would I prefer if he was art director or something? Of course. But anything's better than nothing. Barbe is to DP9 as Blanche is to GW. Maybe even more so. And I'm glad to see the Pod saw that at least enough to get him for a prominent piece of art.
I'm glad too. In a thread a few years ago here on dakka, he surprisingly got alot of hate for his style whereas for me he was iconic for HG and a large part of the reason I initially was interested.
So does Blanche, for Warhammer. But both of them, more Barbe, I think, just because there's less art and less artists involved, completely set the visual tones of their respective worlds (or at least massively influenced them). And not having him involved in at least SOME way in the 20th year edition would be criminal.
Well, in Blanche's case, I think criticism is deserved. It's all style and no functionality or substance and I'm not a fan of that. When I posted Barbe's art, people thought it lacked detail and didn't like the cartoony colors... which is odd given the anime inspired (or copied dependning on who you talk to) universe. But I can't stand Blanche's art and I really do rank it as the worst in post rogue trader 40k art personally. Jes Goodwin for me is the goto guy when I want retro/classic 40k art to drool over. He's by no means perfect but his stuff for me keeps the gothic and decaying tech feel of the universe without leaping over the absurdity line that Blanche can't see anymore in his rear view mirror. I do really like the guy who does the 40k covers for the past few years though among the crop of new artists. I can't say the same for most post-Ghislain HG artists though. There are a few nice full page pics in TPS and FIF that likely come from the same artist (the Chasseurs racing, the paradropping Jaegers, and the execution stealth team being some that come to mind) but the character art was pretty bad in HG since he left IMO.
warboss wrote: I can't say the same for most post-Ghislain HG artists though.
I think that's the other big difference between their respective positions of "defined the look". Heavy Gear has never had anyone else make such an impact or even stick to a style.
Yup, Ghislain defined the look of HG for me. I love the art books. I missed this announcement... is it the new HG Blitz! Rulebook, or Arkrite's upcoming RPG release?
HudsonD wrote: [..] How he deals with the customs, I don't know.
maceria wrote: "Good afternoon sir, do you have any commercial merchandise to declare?"
The conversation should prove interesting for the driver(s) if that continues to be Pod SOP during shipping for the KS packages at the planned 'wave per week' rate.
I think the Pod is the only company I've ever ordered anything from outside of the US that actively tries to circumvent their own national postal system.
bobloblah wrote: In all seriousness, this whole thing has gone better than I expected, but that's really just because DP9 actually appears to be listening to some small amount of feedback. Still, the only renders that look decent to me are the Caprice Mounts, and I wouldn't say they look good, just okay. Most of the others look like a combination of poor modeling and attempts to cut corners/costs (which I think is a function of not raising enough money for what they said they would deliver). But again, at least they're listening to feedback and making some positive changes. As ever, we'll see.
Too bad though for the non-vocal backers and any future customers that those few attempts at improvements are already considered "good enough", especially for the models that are clearly not ready to be molded:
DP9 in the July 23rd Update wrote:The 3d model parts have been given to the plastic injection mold company to get the parts sprued and molds made, which will should take about 2 months. We hope to have the first plastic samples in late September.
At that point we'll be able to calculate all the shipping weights for our International Backer reward packages and as them to pay the exact shipping cost via the Pledge Manager or PayPal. Canadian and US Backers have already paid their basic $15 shipping cost.
The US company doing all our plastics should be able to get all the plastic sprues produced and shipped to us in October. As soon as we receive them, we plan on shipping at least one shipping wave per week and get all the Backer reward packages shipped out by the end of November.
So then, prototypes to check actual physical parts and assembly for appearance or any problems - pretty unlikely to ever happen and far too late once any molds get cut in the immediate future. It was still a good suggestion though, right, and so what if the plastic models end up looking like things everybody could use to play Rivet Wars.
What is the takeaway from all of this supposed to be, that "We at the Pod promise to do better next time we do a KS as these are only less played core models for core factions that we 'promise' to continue producing as metal models."?
I think the Pod is the only company I've ever ordered anything from outside of the US that actively tries to circumvent their own national postal system.
In fairness, as a Canadian, holy Canada Post is terrible.
warboss wrote: If you want milk from that shape container, go straight to the udder!
It's actually quite practical if you need enough milk for 3 children and 2 adults and live about 10 km from the nearest store. Much simpler that straight from the udder, which, IIRC, would requires more than 6 goats. Don't know how many cows that would be.
Why are we talking about milk and cows? Thought this was a thread about the Heavy Gear Kickstarter!
Time to get this thread back on track! What was the latest news? 3D rendering done, but we don't like it as the gears don't look like apes, but like more like robots or something? And of course, more delays... but Dave assures us we should see something by 2017...
You know, looking at the renders (this is all semi-educated guessery until we see models) I got to thinking: would it make more sense, from a hobbiest perspective, to cast armor skirt pieces separate, and attach them to the waist line? It would certainly make the hips easier to cast I imagine, and absolutely make them easier to re-pose.
Wasn't one of the reasons mentioned about why they couldn't properly fix the Kodiak shoulder armor plate to be a separate piece instead of a depressed inset detail because of limited space on the sprue? If I am remembering that detail correctly, that is probably why. Another might be that they're trying to keep the parts count down for ease as this is mostly a kickstarter for a starter set which by definition is aimed at new players.
Dave, any news on the HG front? Did all of the minis unlocked go to tool moulding or are some still being tweaked? You guys have been pretty good with updates so figured I'd ping here to see if progress had been made during this month since it's been 3 weeks since the last update.
Last update I saw on their forum was there is still some model tweaking, and they have started packing non-model incidentals, bases, dice, tapes, etc.
You are correct, sprue space has been cited as a cause for making as low piece count as possible. Luckily I have plenty of practice snipping/pinning/gluing those stupid XV-8 arms. I can definitely see how simpler models would be more beginner friendly, just look at Warmahoards success in bringing gamers into the hobby.
I think it's gone to print, so to speak. Dave put up a blog post about how many bases he's going to pre-pack so that they're ready for the sprues when they come back from the factory.
Look on the bright side, keeping piece count low is good considering what happened with the RTT models.
Cool. Personally I'm pretty excited for the plastic models. Metal is nice, but they're tiny and plastic is easier to work with for conversions and such. Plus it'll be nice to have something more accessible for those of us fans who are used to plastic as the gold-standard set by GW.
On a somewhat related side note, I'm also selling a metal painted 3,000+ pt (in blitz points) Southern Heavy Gear army to sell as a complete lot. It's not in my swap shop thread yet but if anyone is more interested in the old sculpts, send me a pm and I'll send you the link to my blog here and the gallery with the pics. I'll still have two other smaller armies to (not) play so no worries about me; I'll still have things to gripe about when the new rules come out! I've also got a UEDF part of a Robotech Starter (including the rulebook) plus four more destroids (all NOS) for sale soon if anyone is interested in that as well.
As a gamer interested in Heavy Gear models strictly for 15mm sci-fi gaming, is it better to get the metals at the discount now or wait for the plastics to come out and hope the price and posing work out?
How well do the metals hold up to assembly without needing to pin them?
What's everyone's best guess for when the plastics will hit retail, Q1 2016? Q2?
Though we have not seen any of the plastics in hand, the current belief is that the metals will still be superior in detail even once the plastics come out.
Probably best to wait until we have plastic in hand, before making a judgement. Metal will probably be what you want for display minis though. It'll be nice to have the option available for both though, even if I'm heavily biased in favour of plastic for gaming.
As Robert pointed out, that detail tends to disappear on the table-top. Me, I have a thing for a cel-shaded paintjob, so excessive detail doesn't really gel with that sort of flat colour.
I agree that you'd need to wait. The renders seem a bit stiffer but that could just be a byproduct of it being a render. Supposedly there might be more movement at some joints (the arms) although the metals had more variety in official poses (running vs kneeling vs standing). I don't recall seeing more than one pose option for the plastics but the upside is that even if they only have one static GI JOE pose that you can cut and reglue plastic into different poses much easier. In any case, the current thinking is that you'll have to wait until the Kickstarter delivery date +5 weeks IIRC unless DP9 has delayed it further without my knowledge.
Just checked in on the kickstarter page... no updates in almost a full month. The last quick update that was basically a pic of the patch said there would be a juicy follow up within two weeks and it has been almost four.
Dave, any news? Did all the molds get made in the intervening month? How is the rules update progressing? I'd hate to have this campaign campaign start turning into another infamous one that posts short updates with promises of more info followed up by weeks/months of silence.
Thanks for the replies, all. I've ordered some stuff off of the Warstore with their 50% off deal. Should get me enough to start messing around with what I have in mind.
Nomeny wrote: [..] As Robert pointed out, that detail tends to disappear on the table-top. [..]
It might be wise in general for anyone to always consider carefully whether or not a source may be choosing to promote a specific point of view to justify a decision (or two, or three) already made under an entirely different, and usually unmentioned, rationale.
DP9 wrote:Sorry we have not posted any new updates in the last few weeks. We've been trying to figure out how to deal with some unexpected problems that have delayed the manufacture of the steel plastic injection molds.
So we'll bring everyone up to speed with this weeks update of whats going on. Back in early August we uploaded all the 3d model parts and plans for what parts get sprued together for each robot in the plastic injection molds. We then had to wait for a the company making the molds to have free space in their production line to look at the parts and get back to us with final sprue layouts. In early September they got back to us with notes on a few detail problems they found with the parts. Mainly some of the raised details being to small to be machined out in the molds and some small areas with knife edges. We knew that our first time making plastic injection molds would be a learning experience. Now we know that the smallest drill used by the machines to cut molds is 0.3 mm in diameter and when the cavity is cut into the mold it leaves a 0.15 mm rounded edge. We have some raised details that are 0.1 and 0.2 mm wide and they all need to be fixed up. Also when two of these round fillet edges are to close to one another the gap between them makes a very fine knife edge of steel in the mold. We have to fill in these areas or make them a bit wider, if we don't the knife edge can get broken off during mold polishing or in the popping of plastic and then that detail is gone from the miniature. In order to properly check all the hundreds of parts for potential problems, we have acquired a new software last week that enables us to preview a parts mold cavity. Our modelers are starting work on checking and making the fixes necessary for the parts to work in the molds and look great.
These fixes are going to take a few weeks to get them all done right. Our planned Backer rewards shipping starting in late October and November is going to get pushed back. We don't know the exact date yet, but once all the parts are fixed it will take about 1 to 2 months for the molds to be made. Then they can go into production, which will take another few weeks. So its not likely that we will able to ship in time for Christmas, but sometime in early 2016.
In other news, work is progressing on the Heavy Gear Blitz Living Rulebook update which should be out later this week. We'll do another Kickstarter update when it goes live to let everyone know to go download it. We have a few preview pages to show, first off is the Game Tokens Sheet, shown below more colorful that before and trying look more like the acrylic game tokens.
DP9 wrote:Now we know that the smallest drill used by the machines to cut molds is 0.3 mm in diameter and when the cavity is cut into the mold it leaves a 0.15 mm rounded edge. We have some raised details that are 0.1 and 0.2 mm wide and they all need to be fixed up. Also when two of these round fillet edges are to close to one another the gap between them makes a very fine knife edge of steel in the mold. We have to fill in these areas or make them a bit wider, if we don't the knife edge can get broken off during mold polishing or in the popping of plastic and then that detail is gone from the miniature.
emphasis added ...
That... that's the kind of question you should ask before starting to design the miniatures. It should not come as a surprise during the pre-machining verification.
This is the first lecture of design 101: ask about the constraints before you design, not after.
Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticedd at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
warboss wrote: Just checked in on the kickstarter page... no updates in almost a full month.
Did all the molds get made in the intervening month?
Update is up.
No molds were made, due to issues with the way parts were detailed.
As a result, the Pod is now looking at early 2016, after missing the 2015 holiday season.
No complaints here. This is the second time it has happened since a post here by me on dakka asking for one but I don't know if that is just coincidence or causality. In the end, the result is the same and we have an update and I'm happy.
mrondeau wrote:
That... that's the kind of question you should ask before starting to design the miniatures. It should not come as a surprise during the pre-machining verification. This is the first lecture of design 101: ask about the constraints before you design, not after.
Nomeny wrote:Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticedd at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
It's one of the first things listed on shapeways when you look at the various materials available. When I uploaded a model, I didn't personally have a way of checking my 3D Max model (at least that I was aware of without any formal instruction) but I was aware of the limitation. I know that's an apples to oranges comparison but it indicates that the info was available at least to a complete noob like me. I'm surprised that this wasn't communicated properly (either the manufacturer flat out saying it or DP9 simply asking about the limitations before designing the models*). I'll classify this under growing pains/learning experience. I expect some amount of stuff like this with a first time KS. As long as the delays don't keep adding up endlessly and the company is honestly communicating about them with backers, I'm fine with it. Basically, don't palladium or prodos the project. My personal inconvience cutoff would be gencon next year. If they haven't done most of the delivery to backers by then, I'll start worrying.
* And, yes, Smilodon, I'm aware of DP9's long history of being told they can't or really shouldn't do something (rules, models, fluff, etc) and then doing it anyways... and then having to correct the "mistake" later.
Nomeny wrote: Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticedd at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
Alternatively, the smallest possible size of details is a pretty fundamental part of the specification, and a rather obvious thing to ask about if it's not included in the documentation.
When making miniatures, it is, in fact, the kind of things that you use to choose a manufacturer.
Nomeny wrote: Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticedd at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
Alternatively, the smallest possible size of details is a pretty fundamental part of the specification, and a rather obvious thing to ask about if it's not included in the documentation.
When making miniatures, it is, in fact, the kind of things that you use to choose a manufacturer.
Sorry, which plastic miniatures do you make and sell?
Nomeny wrote: Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticedd at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
Alternatively, the smallest possible size of details is a pretty fundamental part of the specification, and a rather obvious thing to ask about if it's not included in the documentation.
When making miniatures, it is, in fact, the kind of things that you use to choose a manufacturer.
Sorry, which plastic miniatures do you make and sell?
Nomeny wrote: Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticedd at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
Alternatively, the smallest possible size of details is a pretty fundamental part of the specification, and a rather obvious thing to ask about if it's not included in the documentation. When making miniatures, it is, in fact, the kind of things that you use to choose a manufacturer.
Sorry, which plastic miniatures do you make and sell?
You don't need to make plastic miniatures to know there are limitations inherent to EVERY manufacturing process just like you don't need to be a trained chef to know that food has an expiration date. It is reasonable, however, to expect professionals in both fields to proactively check and be aware of that before they start to do their job.
That's not a minor defect that was caught late in the process by dutiful QA, that's a major redo of pretty much the whole line.
Whichever company they picked clearly didn't brief DP9 on design.
warboss wrote: You don't need to make plastic miniatures to know there are limitations inherent to EVERY manufacturing process just like you don't need to be a trained chef to know that food has an expiration date.
I've watched a fair amount of Kitchen Nightmares, and it's not obvious that all chefs understand about expiration dates, or even simple cleanliness. The sheer amount of mold and rotten food I've seen in what are supposed to be professional kitchens is both mind boggling and stomach churning. And in theory, everybody has a basic concept of cooking and cleanliness.
That said, it's a bit odd that the Pod didn't have a clear concept of how their molds would be cut by their manufacturing partner, that no information or specs were provided to the Pod, for them to make allowances for machining. Now, I wonder if they considered materials shrinkage / warpage when cooling, etc...
HudsonD wrote: That's not a minor defect that was caught late in the process by dutiful QA, that's a major redo of pretty much the whole line.
Whichever company they picked clearly didn't brief DP9 on design.
warboss wrote: You don't need to make plastic miniatures to know there are limitations inherent to EVERY manufacturing process just like you don't need to be a trained chef to know that food has an expiration date. It is reasonable, however, to expect professionals in both fields to proactively check and be aware of that before they start to do their job.
[..] That said, it's a bit odd that the Pod didn't have a clear concept of how their molds would be cut by their manufacturing partner, that no information or specs were provided to the Pod, for them to make allowances for machining. Now, I wonder if they considered materials shrinkage / warpage when cooling, etc...
Or possibly the information was known but never got communicated to the new artist(s) when the software and renders all got changed back in what, February/March, following completion of the campaign and the initial renders shown last November.
Nomeny wrote: Alternately, like so many constraints to actual production, it wasn't in the specifications and only got noticed at a step in the process intended to catch such mistakes because actual production is a messier business than Design 101 lets on?
Alternatively, the smallest possible size of details is a pretty fundamental part of the specification, and a rather obvious thing to ask about if it's not included in the documentation.
When making miniatures, it is, in fact, the kind of things that you use to choose a manufacturer.
As with a couple of other kickstarters, or just miniature molding in general, this seems like a pretty basic point to overlook so late in the process; especially if a firms existing molding process already involves some form of draft/undercut/shrinkage calculations.
I think there was a Pod update or two as well, if not a post by TPTB on the regular forums, already discussing some of those very same manufacturing necessities and limitations.
But does it have AAA stick it to the man/publisher esports freemium microtransactions? 'Cuz that is what the cool kids want according to the pair of HGA crowdfunding attempts. I wish they had followed the advice given on the forums and gone that route instead. While I've always preferred HG to Battletech both on the tabletop and PC back in the day, I fully admit Battletech was the bigger property so I don't think HGA would have had the same level of funding so quickly if they had designed a game that the community wants.. but I'm confident they would have reached their funding goal by the end of the campaign.
I fear that even if Heavy Gear had run an identical campaign, with the same studio, proposed game and all they would have got far, far less than Battletech has,
simply because there is a huge legacy of Battletech players/ex players both from the tabletop and the computer game world,
even at it's height Heavy Gear didn't have anything like the appeal
(not that I think they made anything like a decent job of their own campaign, but even if they had it wasn't going to set the world on fire)
That's what I said (but I'm not sure if you think you're disagreeing with me). Battletech has always been #1 but the HGA game would have been much better funded than it was if they hadn't chosen the format they did for the game.
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: I fear that even if Heavy Gear had run an identical campaign, with the same studio, proposed game and all they would have got far, far less than Battletech has,
simply because there is a huge legacy of Battletech players/ex players both from the tabletop and the computer game world,
even at it's height Heavy Gear didn't have anything like the appeal
(not that I think they made anything like a decent job of their own campaign, but even if they had it wasn't going to set the world on fire)
I'm sure, too!
I'm also sure that they would have needed a lot less money to fund that kind of game, though, which is the whole point.
Not really the place to be discussing Battletech, or the new turn-based game... Here's the place, although that said I found discussion in that thread around introducing the board game to people interesting in that it reflected my experience of dropping the game like a rock when I discovered other games that weren't half so boring, like Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader, which is saying something.
The issue with molds seems... odd. I mean, that appears to be a major communications miss on both parties. Unless we aren't being told something, which is possible.
I'm not too concerned about a moved back date, it's Kickstarter. Delays are inherent. People often forget that kickstarter is not a store, it's a place where you give artists and designers money to support their projects. In return, they usually give you some copies of their art/project.
Also, that Battletech looks sweet. I'm very fond of HBS. Stompy Bot just makes me very upset anytime I see more of HGA leaked.
That is the same as saying Uber is not a taxi company, just a company that facilitates a taxi like experience between a driver and a customer through communication apps. Just a definition that tries to avoid liability for anything.
If walks like a pre-order, talks like a pre-order, then it's a preorder.
solkan wrote: And, even in those terrible days before Kickstarter and even before the Internet, sometimes pre-orders got delayed because of manufacturing mistakes.
Indeed they did... and it inconvienenced only a fraction of the playerbase since only the hardest of the hardcore would pay weeks (not months or years) in advance for a single SKU at full price plus shipping. That isn't the same thing as now where you pay years in advance for a huge lots of deeply discounted minis. The responsiblity of the producer in making sure what they're advertising for sale and the protections for the consumer should INCREASE when you change the model like that, not decrease. In any case, I don't feel the HGks is in trouble regardless at the moment but that will change if they don't get all cylinders correctly firing by next summer.
Any news on the Heavy Gear kickstarter front? We're fast approaching the one month mark since the last one and I'm curious to see if there has been progress on the designs and moulds.
Yeah, I was a bit disappointed about that being a fan of his work when I got the update last night. I don't know if Brandon will admit it but I suspect he's bummed out by this too as a Ghislainian himself. :( That said, the new guy's stuff isn't bad (at least when you filter out the horrible HGA gear designs out).
The new cover's messy, indistinct, and makes the game look like a spin-off of HGA. Which I guess is not a hugely bad thing, since HGA (if it ever properly launches) will definitely have more coverage and players.
I certainly hope that backers will get a meaty update on the progress of each model before the end of the year. We haven't had any info on the actual minis since the delay annoucement back in September. Even if the news is bad, a breakdown of what is what sprue by sprue would be much appreciated.
Woohoo! My wish was granted with a mid-day KS update... with the sprues that I actually wanted to see as well! They're also hoping for a late 1st quarter ship date start (so March to April for shipping if all goes as planned?).
JohnHwangDD wrote: Those are literally the easiest kits to convert and sprue up. Next will be the Tanks.
The real question are the "classic" Gears.
They are indeed the easiest ones, yes. They are also the ones most people are actually waiting for, as the current prices to make a caprice army are bonkers.
They look nice enough, IMHO, but I can't help but notice that those sprues are frakking tiny! What the hell, man? Wasn't doing a crapload of tiny sprues a much worse idea than doing a reduced number of bigger ones? Has the sprue size been decided on, or is it an imposed thing because of the producer?
@John: It's also more progress than the "other" 80's anime robot game kickstarter has shown in a full year. I'm looking at that little dixie cup as half full admittedly but it's still the first real sign of model/sprue progress since September. If they put out another update like that this year (whether another "easy" one like CEF or a "hard" one like the polar factions), I'll be a very happy camper.
@Albertorius: The common "groupthink" knowledge is that the moulds are very expensive (tens of thousands of dollars today.. previously decades ago much more than that) and the shots are cheap. If the realistic expectation is that you don't expect to sell tons and tons of minis like GW and you don't actually have extra money to splurge initially, it's better to pay less up front and have a larger deferred tail cost. In my decidedly zero insider status opinion, that's probably the situation DP9 is in realistically. YMMV. Salt as needed.
@Albertorius - I get that these are a production cost saving, which is why the big tanks are being converted to plastic. It is unclear how much saving will be achieved when these are made available at retail. Do you think the Pod will cut the MSRP in half, passing on those cost savings directly to the customer? Or will they take note of how GW manages to sell tiny individual Character plastic models for $20 or more? What do you think the Pod will do?
I am assuming the sprues are "tiny" so as to be packaged and sold as singles. OTOH, if you've seen any of the recent GW stuff, they do single model sprues the size of a playing card. I don't know why they wouldn't have been designed at least as 1 model per sprue, vs 2+? sprues per model.
____
@warboss - RRT sets an awfully low bar, and I'm sure it warms the Pod to know that someone is doing an objectively worse job at new product over the past calendar year. OTOH, RRT did deliver roughly half the stuff that backers paid for, whereas the Pod has yet to actually deliver anything to anyone. A day late and a dollar short is objectively better than nothing.
I'm also agreed that sprues are designed to minimize overall development and tooling cost.
JohnHwangDD wrote: @Albertorius - I get that these are a production cost saving, which is why the big tanks are being converted to plastic. It is unclear how much saving will be achieved when these are made available at retail. Do you think the Pod will cut the MSRP in half, passing on those cost savings directly to the customer? Or will they take note of how GW manages to sell tiny individual Character plastic models for $20 or more? What do you think the Pod will do?
I am assuming the sprues are "tiny" so as to be packaged and sold as singles. OTOH, if you've seen any of the recent GW stuff, they do single model sprues the size of a playing card. I don't know why they wouldn't have been designed at least as 1 model per sprue, vs 2+? sprues per model.
____
@warboss - RRT sets an awfully low bar, and I'm sure it warms the Pod to know that someone is doing an objectively worse job at new product over the past calendar year. OTOH, RRT did deliver roughly half the stuff that backers paid for, whereas the Pod has yet to actually deliver anything to anyone. A day late and a dollar short is objectively better than nothing.
I'm also agreed that sprues are designed to minimize overall development and tooling cost.
Objectively, Robotech was a year late from their earliest wild guess when they started delivery on less than half of the rewards (and have delivered nothing since in the intervening year) and Heavy Gear is currently technically 4 days late as of today with a projection of 4 months late for all of the rewards. I agree that it's a low bar to leap over and things may change for HG but it isn't fair to say that robotech accomplished anything more than HG until the latter reaches 1 year late. I sincerely hope that won't be the case.
As for the cost, I don't think that DP9 is in a position to pull a GW on the models. The average gear in metal costs $10-20 depending on the type when bought individually and in the kickstarter were $5-10. Even if they bump up the KS price by 50% to account for a retail tiered margin, that's still no where near GW. GW is the market leader (albeit decreasing in share) and they can't apparently sustain their own ridiculous price points. A much, much smaller company making their first (and likely last if they screw it up) push in the market is even less likley to be able to maintain such a lack of value. Price point was a big issue of why folks did NOT get into HG especially for the larger resin models and the switch over to plastic is supposed to help in that regard.
If the Pod pulls a GW and slaps insane prices on the new models, like they're doing with those ridiculous chibis, they're toast and Heavy Gear dies. Like Warboss said, pricepoint was ALREADY a problem. If some idiot at the company wants to put up a big promotion for "NEW AND IMPROVED - And you get to pay more because of that!" then that will be the decision that damns them.
I put very, very little faith in the decision-making skills over there, but they're not THAT stupid.
Firebreak wrote: [..] I put very, very little faith in the decision-making skills over there, but they're not THAT stupid.
Possibly - a question remains however, especially given the flap over retail box pricing back during the KS, on whether or not they are THAT greedy.
ferrous wrote: "We loved the Heavy Gear Assault computer game concept artwork done by Lorenz Hideyoshi Ruwwe for Stompybot Productions. "
Wow, someone out there liked the HGA concept art?
Well, as per usual Robert and so long as he and at least one other person like something everyone else has to as well because they'll be stuck with it regardless of quality, suitability, or any other factor.
Likewise, when was chibi -- everything -- decided as being acceptable to everyone; because now it's yet another written in stone fait accompli from TPTB in Pod-land which was presented for comments solely on Facebook.
Spoiler:
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
November 17 at 8:16am wrote:New Chibi Artwork for the upcoming Quick Start Rulebook!
We are working on the Quick Start Rulebook right now, which is part of the War for Terra Nova Kickstarter Core Starter Set. The rules section needed a bit of fun added, so we asked artist John Bell to do a series of Chibi Gear artworks to liven it up.
Here is a small sample of two artworks, the Chibi Hunter rolling dice and a Chibi Hunter holding a ruler. We`ll preview more of the artwork in future posts while we are working on the Rulebook layout. We should have a Quick Start Rulebook beta version ebook ready to show and get players feedback in a few weeks.
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
November 18 at 5:08pm wrote:Chibi Jager Artwork Preview!
A few more Chibi Gear artworks to show from our artist John Bell. This time the Chibi Jager gets to strut its stuff, shown walking and in top speed running for the movement section of the upcoming Quick Start Rulebook.
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
November 20 at 6:26am wrote:Chibi Jager Ground Mode Artwork Preview!
Here are a few more of the new Chibi artworks from the upcoming Quick Start Rulebook. This time the Chibi Jager in ground mode and top speed, with dust cloud added in back, for the movement section. Enjoy and have a great weekend.
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
November 23 at 7:20am wrote:More Chibi Hunter and Jager Artwork!
Today we have a preview of the Chibi Hunter Climbing and Jager Falling artwork, from the upcoming Quick Start Rulebook.
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
November 24 at 5:45pm wrote:Chibi Command Jager Artwork!
The command and orders section of the Quick Start Rulebook will include these new Chibi Command Jager artworks, done by John Bell.
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
November 25 at 5:16pm wrote:Wise Man Say: Don't Bring a Knife to an Axe Fight!
Another new Chibi artwork today, this time from the Melee section of the upcoming Quick Start Rulebook, with a Chibi Hunter facing off against a Chibi Jager. I think I'll put my money on the South for this one.
We want to give everyone a quick heads up that tomorrow is Thanksgiving Day in the USA. We'll be doing a special post on Thursday morning with news on our Thanksgiving Black Friday Weekend promotion on the Dream Pod 9 Online Store and our new exclusive treat for the Holiday Season.
Dream Pod 9, Inc.
December 2 at 5:00pm wrote:Last of the Quick Start Rulebook Chibi Artworks!
John did a Chibi Hunter holding binoculars and hand radio for the forward observation section and one hiding behind a rock outcropping for the cover section. We hope you have enjoyed the Chibi artwork previews from the upcoming Quick Start Rulebook, we'll continue working on the layout and should have it ready as an ebook beta version before Christmas for everyone to checkout.
I'm of two minds about the chibi garbage. The first is that they're a stupid waste of money (they may have been budgeted in the KS, but that money could and should have gone to something better), time, and resources. The game (and company) is nowhere near secure enough for extraneous things like that. That sounds a little stupid, I know - "There's no room in this game for fun things!!" Well, in a way, there's not, but that's another discussion.
But on the other hand.
As stupid as I think the chibis are, the other two companies working on Heavy Gear products right now are going weeks or even months without a peep. At least these stupid little joke minis and art pieces represent getting ANYTHING out of the company at all. Would it be better to have weekly updates and previews of sprues, rules, models - heck, even pictures from the plant making the molds! Yeah, of course it would. Of course. But at least DP9 is making some kind of attempt at regular communication, something that has, in the last couple years, been another issue for them.
Being that far north, the force of gravity is higher and hence the predilection for smooshed squat thinks like Chibi stuff. It's pseudoscience and pseudoscience doesn't lie. This, of course, also explains Sants's elves.
The test models from the molds will hit the Pod in March for approval, and there will be more than likely some changes to be made, so call it two extra months (May), then the molds get on a slow boat to Canada (June). Production begins in June/July, shipment to backers in August. Awesome!
JohnHwangDD wrote: Interesting KS update today, in which we learned that the Pod didn't hedge against currency fluctuation, so the deal has changed. *jazz hands*
I don't think that last part about "jazz hands" is a fair assessment. They're being open and honest in a relatively timely fashion about a global situation clearly out of their control. They're not trying to hide it behind platitudes, guilt trips, and vague blame shifting to third parties that we can't verify nor can the 3rd parties likely respond. Does it decrease the "value" of the average pledge? I'd say yes but minimally so. It is especially irksome if you're a polar player who was counting on those gears. They are though at least attempting to rectify it partially by adding a Caprice mount and some extra bits as well as reopening the pledge manager to get other stuff for add ons. I consider both this type of change to the pledges given the circumstances acceptable (but obviously not optimal) as is the delay of 6-8 months. I'll be the first to criticize them when they choose to screw up but I don't believe that is the case here. YMMV but if the company responsible for the "jazz hands" kickstarter had delivered all but a few models and less than a year late I'd have been ecstatic.
Different people might have different opinions as to what might be acceptable. If the Pod is dumping polar gears, shouldn't they have run off another polar sprue to directly replace them? Or used the KS backer input by asking? At least the gakbags at PB pretended to ask the backers about any changes. Here it's unilateral changes, take it or leave it. If one were counting on those Gears, could one demand a refund? By most Consumer Law, definitely.
If you're disappointed but interested in making some of that money back and then some, I'd offer to buy less than one quarter of the standard pledge (the caprice stuff, no rulebook) for one third of what you paid in USD at that time ($115CAD) plus actual shipping to me. That offer is open to anyone here. Pm me if interested.
Well, the company has certainly made a lot of management errors (and apparently, not getting the moulds quotes written in a contract was one of those), and they didn't make enough provisions for the currency fluctuations (...like, you know, changing the money to the currency you'll be paying on from the get go).
This has prompted them to break some promises, as in not producing two models of the ones opened in stretch goals, and for some people those models might very well be the ones they actually wanted, so it is a gakky proposition, no matter how you look at it.
OTOH, they have actually told us what the problems were, what they have done to counter them as much as possible, and a mostly concrete timeline forward, with possible points of delay. So I can't really compare them with PB, all told.
OTOOH, if there were supposed to be Sidewinders and Tigers in the core sets/armies, DP9 should really either replace them with additional Hunters/Jägers (or possibly Jaguars/BMs), or they should just put some metal ones to substitute for them. That way, the blowback will be a lot less intense.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
warboss wrote: If you're disappointed but interested in making some of that money back and then some, I'd offer to buy less than one quarter of the standard pledge (the caprice stuff, no rulebook) for one third of what you paid in USD at that time ($115CAD) plus actual shipping to me. That offer is open to anyone here. Pm me if interested.
I see that the PM has been reopened, so apparently you could be able to buy them.
The thing I'm actually most curious about is how long have TPTB in Pod-land known this was going to be an issue, because this decision is pretty much a total 180-degree change from the comments made after the last previous updates of substantial news.
Albertorius wrote: [..]OTOOH, if there were supposed to be Sidewinders and Tigers in the core sets/armies, DP9 should really either replace them with additional Hunters/Jägers (or possibly Jaguars/BMs), or they should just put some metal ones to substitute for them. That way, the blowback will be a lot less intense.
A bit surprising that if they're hurting so badly for $$$ they didn't drop the Ferret along with the Tiger & Sidewinder; seems a bit questionable and indeed arbitrary.
Keeping the full amount of almost always immediately replaced (and for many folks, already owned/more easily acquired) Hunters & Jägers instead of halving them with those respective heavier models for each faction might not have been the better option.
Doing that would have made parts of the KS starter equivalent to the current NuBlitz-oriented (changed in early Summer 2014?) Northern and Southern General Purpose combat groups while leaving in the original variety.
Playing the incompatible file(s)/new 3D modeler(s)/misunderstood tolerances cards (or, the dance of ''Why didn't we ask these questions even though everybody told us to do so?'') over the past year+ definitely seems to have come back to bite TPTB of Pod-land in the backside.
Not directly naming their chosen production manufacturer while all but directly naming it anyways in broad hints seems kind of strange, as well as using Chinese produced molds instead of choosing a company capable of both CNC'ing molds and doing molding (thus saving a lot of shipping $$$?).
Albertorius wrote: I see that the PM has been reopened, so apparently you could be able to buy them.
Plus, of course, the always classy pushing of the most current chibi sculpt/other not game usable product while telling a tale of why the Pod can't do what was originally promised.
You'd also think for an update this important a few more runs through for spelling and grammar might have been something to consider presenting to variably irate backers; but yeah, Robert.
While it is true that DP9 don't have any ability to influence the value of the Canadian Dollar (versus the HKD for example) this probably wouldn't have happened if they hadn't screwed up with the model design and added months to the whole process, which in itself eats away at the pledge fund. In May last year the CAD was strong, and it peaked again in October (though not as highly) before crashing in December.
I suppose we should be grateful that they have taken the decision to push ahead now rather than sit on things for another few months to see the situation improves but this does highlight the fact that the price of failure is more failure..
Edit: ..and while the option of adding metal replacements to the pledge is a logical step to address the situation, I'm a lot less happy about the metal minis sitting alongside the new plastic ones than I used to be. I'm starting to think they are going to stick out like a sore thumb what with all that extra detail and bulk :(
Albertorius wrote: OTOOH, if there were supposed to be Sidewinders and Tigers in the core sets/armies,
DP9 should really either replace them with additional Hunters/Jägers (or possibly Jaguars/BMs), or they should just put some metal ones to substitute for them. That way, the blowback will be a lot less intense.
There were.
Spoiler:
They probably should.
Spoiler:
But then, people would get an "extra" Black Mamba & Jaguar - net gaining +2 extra models instead of net losing short -1 model... ____
Siygess wrote: While it is true that DP9 don't have any ability to influence the value of the Canadian Dollar (versus the HKD for example) this probably wouldn't have happened if they hadn't screwed up with the model design and added months to the whole process, which in itself eats away at the pledge fund. In May last year the CAD was strong, and it peaked again in October (though not as highly) before crashing in December.(
The Pod could have converted CAD to USD at any time. They could have opened a US bank account and put 80% of the money there, earmarking it for the production costs. Or they could have hedged with a currency option in the US commodities market. Other companies do that all the time. ____
warboss wrote: If you're disappointed but interested in making some of that money back and then some, I'd offer to buy less than one quarter of the standard pledge (the caprice stuff, no rulebook) for one third of what you paid in USD at that time ($115CAD) plus actual shipping to me. That offer is open to anyone here. Pm me if interested.
Now, I'm wondering if I should put out a side offer to buy one set of all 3 Cobras, both Grizzlies & the Kodiak... Be strong, resist temptation!
There are also USD options available on the Montreal exchange that are accessible to pretty much every brokerage account in Canada.
The simplest thing to have done though would be to change the currency and eliminate the risk entirely.
I still don't think the amount raised in this KS will cover everything they have promised and since they are already cutting tooling for miniatures they promised, how are they going to handle any other unexpected costs that come up?
I see that the PM has been reopened, so apparently you could be able to buy them.
Yeah, I saw that in the update. I'm just not willing to buy the whole set as I've currently got more than enough painted northern, southern, and nucoal (my CEF-equivalent) minis and the quarter set faction price is really not competitive especially when you factor in it is also missing the rulebook as well.
The Pod could have converted CAD to USD at any time. They could have opened a US bank account and put 80% of the money there, earmarking it for the production costs. Or they could have hedged with a currency option in the US commodities market. Other companies do that all the time.
I certainly don't know much of anything about international finance but I'd hazard a guess that those companies that do that aren't two man operations focused on niche hobby projects. I'd also guess that keeping it in the US would result in some sort of tax complications over and beyond the normal business practices the pod engages in. They probably chose the easiest route and if the world economy hadn't gak on the Canadian dollar (and of course they hadn't had their own delays) they'd have been ok. In this case, they weren't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
frozenwastes wrote: There are also USD options available on the Montreal exchange that are accessible to pretty much every brokerage account in Canada.
The simplest thing to have done though would be to change the currency and eliminate the risk entirely.
I still don't think the amount raised in this KS will cover everything they have promised and since they are already cutting tooling for miniatures they promised, how are they going to handle any other unexpected costs that come up?
I'm guessing with delays. If something else comes up that costs them money then I'd guess they'd do even more extended rolling shipping with the profit from retail sales of the same products paying to ship out backer rewards. Prodos' AVP kickstarter would be an example of that in action.
This is bothering. I can see how they re-balanced the core set, it makes a little more 4-way balance (especially for Caprice, they were getting the short shaft), and it's still very beginner friendly. The long, "yeah, we screwed the poodle" email was very detailed and transparent. It was a nice change from the POD people.
However, I don't think this was the right direction to go. They should have offered the choice of the "New and improved" set, with less Tigers and more crabs, or having some of the pewter Tigers sent your way.
Or ideally, you know, done both. Hit to the bottom line, but customer goodwill is a lot more important.
This does make the objective of putting together a new player friendly introduction set much more apparent.
Points for transparency, but anti-points for what that transparency shows.
maceria wrote: [..] Points for transparency, but anti-points for what that transparency shows.
Oddly, the not friendly/critical comments are still there on both the KS comments and specific update, and even the official forums, but everything disappeared overnight on their FB page update notice.
It's sad that admitting a screw-up is enough to get praise at this point. Even having said that, I'm glad they did. This, more than anything, finally, finally looks like the new leaf they've needed for years. Nowhere in the update is it blamed on the players or backers. (Take note of that, Mektek/Stompybot/whatever fake company you're calling yourselves now.)
It's too bad this happened, and yeah, sure, it was out of their control, but in the same way a tornado is. They could have prepared better, they could have had more money, etc etc etc. But if wishes for horses. Still, I'm just pleased at the honesty.
maceria wrote: [..] Points for transparency, but anti-points for what that transparency shows.
Oddly, the not friendly/critical comments are still there on both the KS comments and specific update, and even the official forums, but everything disappeared overnight on their FB page update notice.
Dun-dun-dun!
It appears that the Pod is learning from the Robotech Masters...
maceria wrote: [..] Points for transparency, but anti-points for what that transparency shows.
Oddly, the not friendly/critical comments are still there on both the KS comments and specific update, and even the official forums, but everything disappeared overnight on their FB page update notice.
_ _
I guess they consider facebook their broadest casual community involvement and wanted to cleanse it. The official forums tend to attract the dedicated players who will find out the scoop regardless so no point in cleansing that as it would likely have the opposite effect of stimulating more discussion. They don't have any control over the KS comments (and admittedly I haven't looked there to see the reaction but every time I did look in 2015 the comments were pretty much a ghostown) unless someone blatantly violates the terms and then they can only flag it for someone else.
The KS comments have gotten a lot more interesting.
I particularly like this one:
Bill 'Wystan' C. wrote:So if I have 2 Core pledges I lose:
2 Tigers
2 SideWinders
2 Sets of Drones
and I gain what Exactly?
2 Acco Mounts
Seeing as I wanted Mechs here more than Mounts I am not overly happy with this. I think that another sprue of models should be given to replace the ones lost. Heck, give one additional set of sprues from one of the 5 for each Core Set (They cost pennies on the dollar to cast once the molds are paid for and we did pay for the molds right?)
And he goes on to add:
Bill 'Wystan' C. wrote:@Phillip - Hence my Point. I would love to see Sprue Collection 1, 2 or 5 added. 5 Gives back the drones and gives back 4 Mechs as well...
Mold 5 will include the Ferret (with 3 Drones), F2-25, Kodiak, and King Cobra
This would have been the correct fix. Upgrade the Tiger and Sidewinders to King Cobras & Kodiaks, and tossing in a F2-25 and Ferret as compensation for the reduction in variety.
warboss wrote: They probably chose the easiest route and if the world economy hadn't gak on the Canadian dollar (and of course they hadn't had their own delays) they'd have been ok. In this case, they weren't.
Except that the drop started during the Kickstarter. It has gotten worst since, but it was obvious at that point that the drop would continue at least for the next couple of year, and that they had to take measures immediately, or they would end up in the mess they have to deal with now.
In fact, I assumed at the time that this was the first thing DP9 did, since they had to deal with currency fluctuations between CAD and USD for a while.
Turn out that, once more, DP9 managed to surprise me with their incompetence.
Man alive, all of these financial geniuses are popping out of the woodwork. If only somebody could have advised the Pod at some point over the past year...
JohnHwangDD wrote: Man alive, all of these financial geniuses are popping out of the woodwork. If only somebody could have advised the Pod at some point over the past year...
Any qualified accountant who looked over things after they got their funding should have pointed out the currency risk to them.
Speaking as a Canadian, we all (that is, the commoners) knew this was coming. We're all just used to having our dollar be a bit of a joke. Maybe not THIS bad, but the loonie was never going to stay up there.
I've been watching this thread for quite some time and a few things occur to me.
First, let me say that i've "dabbuled" with HG since the RAFM days, and i love the fluff of the game, the newer miniatures, and i am happy with the last(printed) version of BLITZ.
Does anyone play "non competitive" games of HG anymore? Seems most of the bitching on this thread is about the competitive side of the game. I don't see much about "just for fun, grab some gears and lets mosh" kind of game my son and i like. just wondering about that.
And why the hate for the pod people? Mean to say, can't we all agree that gak happens, and cut this company a bit of a break? The head pod guy comes here, members mock him, does'nt seem inviting. I doubt i'd come back.
Lastly, alot of people here seem to wish dp9 would "tank".Thats kinda crappy. People losing jobs is'nt something to happily hope for. I'm very sure the dp9 people want their game to be successful.Attacking the company does'nt make scense to me.
Hell, I don't even know how you could even do that, over here.
Hate for the Pod People: I certainly don't hate anyone from the pod. I'm just very disappointed with them, and that? That they have earned in spades.
dp9 tanking: Never hoped that. Them getting their gak together? More times I can remember. And I think nobody can say I haven not been willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Repeatedly, even.
bound by glory, what you seem to not really get is that most of the "haters" here are like that for very valid reasons. And that they weren't haters. Actually, most of the people here have been staunch supporters, or have worked there, or have been playtesters. Or all of that at the same time.
Did you read them? Are the comments untrue? Did the Pod not push nice minis with terrible rules, unrestrained creep and excessive churn? Are you thinking they deserve kudos for that?
As for competitive play, first, you need multiple players who are invested to the point that they want to compete, in a game that supports multiple competitive builds... HG isn't on the shelves. Impenetrable rules stop 80% of the potential players who buy the minis. Gross imbalance and creep kills the competitive potential. Why bother?
bound for glory wrote: Well, if you think you have not "mocked" and "hated on" dream pod 9, my only and best advice is to re read those "71 pages".
I know it's difficult to at that length of a thread but lots of folks listed concrete factual reasons as well as very dissatisfying personal interactions with the members of the pod (past and present) in the thread. Originally, this was actually a constructive criticism thread that I made up here on a third party site specifically because, during a period of supposed openness and willingness to change, the pod was pruning pages of constructive criticism (not "hate" mind you) while at the same time asking for it. The poll on the top of the page was put there to give them (and future customers) a view of what the problem areas were with the game and the company's general policies and procedures. It did admittedly morph into a complaint thread and back into a general topic thread but heated posts don't negate the remarkably unfriendly and short sighted things the pod has done for DECADES nor the direct effect those actions have had on customers. Alot of "haters" you see posting here used to be frequent contributors to the original forums, demo and convention volunteers, playtesters, and even creators of aspects of the game you like.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bound for glory wrote: I've been watching this thread for quite some time and a few things occur to me.
First, let me say that i've "dabbuled" with HG since the RAFM days, and i love the fluff of the game, the newer miniatures, and i am happy with the last(printed) version of BLITZ.
Does anyone play "non competitive" games of HG anymore? Seems most of the bitching on this thread is about the competitive side of the game. I don't see much about "just for fun, grab some gears and lets mosh" kind of game my son and i like. just wondering about that.
Except for about a half dozen down to two people at gencon depending on the year, I don't recall seeing a mention of a competitive scene for heavy gear (aka tourney formats). I had seen postings about large active game groups at one point or another in Las Vegas (alien's group on the forums) and another in one of the Carolina's (can't recall that member's name) but I don't know if they still exist years later or if they ever ran actual tournies. As for "competitive" themed casual play (a bit of an oxymoron but it exists in gaming), I can't comment about that much as I never saw it. Whenever folks got beyond the superficial in the rules, the cracks really started showing and the support from the pod would come in fits and spurts. The Black Talons were hideously broken and undercosted yet were an incredibly popular army (low model count, easy to paint, great fluff, tie in to the video games) and the "fix" for them was a SERIES of points increases (because the first "fix" didn't increase them enough) that were technically voluntary. When I finally met a BT talon player to try the game (he bought the minis after a gencon mini demo), he didn't want to "nerf" his army. I instead offered to only play a double game with him where we EACH took turns playing his talons and both were land slides in his favor against a "balanced" opfor. Nucoals prices were also incredibly out of wack and necessitated a band aid fix for everyone else until they got their new books (a third of the factions never did). Playtesting was a mess with nepotism rampant and folks consisently looking out only to upgrade their own favorite faction (while being "strict" on others). FAQ's and Errattas were promised on a regular basis but you'd be lucky if you got one update a year. None of that really lends itself to a "competitive" scene.
Finally, balanced rules and good support from the manufacturer don't just help the competitive scene. You're not saying it but I've found that fans of certain companies (like DP9 and Palladium) use the perjorative terms like that as derogatory words and a crutch as if having solid rules and support somehow hurts non-competitive gamers. Just in case as an FYI... they don't. If anything, they help them substantially more as those casual players in my experience just flat out drop the game when they encounter the cracks inevitably (whether at the hands of a "competitive" player who trounces them over and over or on their own). The HG blitz rules *SEEM* well thought out and intuitive until you actually start playing and realize the things that should surivive don't and alot of what you end up doing is nothing when you think it should be epic.
And why the hate for the pod people? Mean to say, can't we all agree that gak happens, and cut this company a bit of a break? The head pod guy comes here, members mock him, does'nt seem inviting. I doubt i'd come back. Lastly, alot of people here seem to wish dp9 would "tank".Thats kinda crappy. People losing jobs is'nt something to happily hope for. I'm very sure the dp9 people want their game to be successful.Attacking the company does'nt make scense to me.
I think you'll find people expressing their anger because they've given the company a LOT of breaks and keep getting screwed over. It isn't just "gak happens" but rather why does the pod traditionally choose to always gak right in front of their customers so that they have to step in it. Dp9 has a history of trying to make their game a "short term" success in terms of a quick cash in at the expense of their fans and the long term health of the game/company; that is a valid target for criticism. After so many supposed new leaves turned over and changes of course that always seem to hit the same field of icebergs over and over again, some fans just think the only chance of success for the IP is to separate it from the current owners. It worked for D&D, right? (at least for a time until they started to repeat the same mistakes again a decade later)
bound for glory wrote: Well, if you think you have not "mocked" and "hated on" dream pod 9, my only and best advice is to re read those "71 pages".
Well, apparently I need to quote myself here, then:
Albertorius wrote: Well, after much prodding, I'm compelled to post here (and over at DP9 apparently xD)
I don't play anymore for a lot of reasons. There's the fact that I basically need to make new players to be able to play, or that the minis and the books are both GW-level expensive and almost impossible to get over here (I've lost count of the times a prospective player has ran away after seeing the prices). There's also the fact that the current rules have a lot of holes, and there's no rules support whatsoever. And the power creep between "armies the designer play/like" and "armies that don't", which can get ridiculous. Or the fact that the new southern book basically broke all my southern armies (and no, I didn't do 4-gear cadres). Or the "improved" army creation rules that are even more convoluted and leads to... weird lists (as most games tend to go PL3, the best way to do gear lists tend to be with armor regiments, and viceversa, for example). Or the variant names that mean different things all the time...
Well, you get the idea.
I actually stopped paying attention to the game during the release of the southern book, but to be honest, the breaking point was the NuCoal book and the new fluff.
See, I'm a HG setting nerd. And the NuCoal fluff makes no sense whatsoever. None at all. Worse, to buff it up, they basically killed off another faction, for no net gain I can think of, and adding convolute migration and stupid ball tossing all over Terra Nova, clearly demonstrating that the writer didn't have a working understanding of what distances and surface means at all.
One of the things HG needs is to have two universes. It needs a rpg setting and a very distinct wargame setting. They did it once, with Lightning Strike. But they apparently can't anymore (yes, yes, this is assuming the rpg is not dead, which it is :( ).
Anyways, maybe THIS TIME it will be the time. Maybe THIS TIME they'll do a good job with the core system. Maybe THIS TIME, they'll give rules support that doesn't fiddle out in two weeks after the uproar. Maybe THIS TIME they actually make a wargame.
...yeah, well. Once fooled and all that.
That post is from... two years ago next week. Good god.
Not enough has changed to make me change my posture.
I have been ignoring the main threads about the KS on DP9 site for a while (still read the ones about the rules development) due to most comments sounding like Apple fanboys saying thank you Steve Jobs for giving me phone that I can't hold like a phone, so I decided to take a look after this fiasco.
HA!
So in other words, you swap $12 worth miniatures for a $5 miniature + the added deception of not having the 2 models pledgers paid for?
This is awsome, i'm so excited, thank you very much.
I'm sure their tiny handful of playtesters are doing their absolute best to ensure that their particular collections of models are super effective. Whoever gets the last word in, wins.
This is a side effect of HG being an unpopular game - it's a highly incestuous relationship between the Pod and it's White Knights.
I'm sure their current playtesters are alright enough, as always. Many of the people posting here has been a Pod playtester one time or another.
The problem is (and never has been, not really) their playtesters. The problem is their playtesting methodology. Which can be more or less summed up by JHDD's post, really, although you'd probably need to change "playtester" there for "playtesting coordinator", which are the people that filter the playtesting reports and then feed them to the rules developers.
I'm sure their current playtesters are alright enough, as always. Many of the people posting here has been a Pod playtester one time or another.
The problem is (and never has been, not really) their playtesters. The problem is their playtesting methodology. Which can be more or less summed up by JHDD's post, really, although you'd probably need to change "playtester" there for "playtesting coordinator", which are the people that filter the playtesting reports and then feed them to the rules developers.
The main problem with their playtesting methodology is that's it's not a playtest methodology. It's perfectly designed to generate a lot of noise, not data.
The end results is that those interpreting the playtesting reports can say it means more or less anything they want it to mean.
In fact, if I wanted to create a playtesting procedure to be able to deflect blame for any and all problems on the playtesters, while doing whatever I wanted to do, I would use DP9's testing procedure.
Even if I assume that doing so is not the intention, and that it is just incompetence, DP9 playtesting methodology just results in confirmation bias.
Strangely enough, whenever there was a change of methodology, none of the changes touched the core problems (that is, the absolute refusal to do basic math, to tell the playtesters what is supposed to do what, and to control variables during the playtest)
maceria wrote: [..] Points for transparency, but anti-points for what that transparency shows.
Oddly, the not friendly/critical comments are still there on both the KS comments and specific update, and even the official forums, but everything disappeared overnight on their FB page update notice.
Dun-dun-dun!
It appears that the Pod is learning from the Robotech Masters...
warboss wrote: I guess they consider facebook their broadest casual community involvement and wanted to cleanse it. The official forums tend to attract the dedicated players who will find out the scoop regardless so no point in cleansing that as it would likely have the opposite effect of stimulating more discussion. They don't have any control over the KS comments (and admittedly I haven't looked there to see the reaction but every time I did look in 2015 the comments were pretty much a ghostown) unless someone blatantly violates the terms and then they can only flag it for someone else.
To be as fair as I can be, the FB comments appear to have resurfaced, so their disappearance was either a glitch or because the post got otherwise deleted/modified/whatever happens to comments left on a timeline entry (Yet another of too many reasons I stopped bothering with FB years back).
maceria wrote: I have been ignoring the main threads about the KS on DP9 site for a while (still read the ones about the rules development) due to most comments sounding like Apple fanboys saying thank you Steve Jobs for giving me phone that I can't hold like a phone, so I decided to take a look after this fiasco.
Jake Staines, about 6 hours ago, wrote:So now I have a load of credit in Fundafull but I don't actually want any of the other available add-ons. Is it safe to assume that you've spent it already and I can't get it back?
edit: Looks like no, there will be no refunds period, even if backers want nothing at all from either the KS add-ons or the online store.
DP9, about 5 hours ago, wrote:[..] This money can't be refunded as the majority of it is being used to make the plastic injection molds and have the plastics popped for the Backer Reward Packages.
[..] Now all that being said, we can't do refunds, but we can make available special orders for the Dream Pod 9 Online Store. If there are no other Add-ons in the pledge manager that interest you as replacements to the plastic Tiger and Sidewinder sprues Add-ons which are no longer available.
bound for glory wrote: [..] The head pod guy comes here, members mock him, does'nt seem inviting. I doubt i'd come back.
In all likelihood, that has to do with the questions still being asked here, such as those about things pointed out almost literally two years ago for the Alpha public reveal on the DP9 forums that remain unfixed (and the comments/questions largely removed on that venue).
Some other things removed from the official forums include Dave's thoughts on Gencon not revealing ''any problems'' with NuBlitz & force construction, because nobody took him out drinking to have a chat.
Dave, 30 Sep 2014, at 7:17 PM wrote:This is an announcement thread not an invitation to air grievances. That's what the bars at Gencon are for, which no one invited me out to so I assumed everything was fine. I am locking and sweeping this threat. Please keep it civil and on topics gentlemen or my mod hammer will have to get powered up. I believe that the beta is a very open and welcoming process. If you are at all unclear as to how to contribute drop me a note, I will be happy to offer some suggestions.
TPTB in Pod-land like to come across as ''accommodating'' to the folks paying to play the game they are trying to produce, but every now and then either of them will let slip some comment or gripe beyond just ordinary frustration that reveals another side entirely.
Dream Pod 9 personnel includes two (2) somewhat full-time persons and one or two (1-2) interns.
Three (3) somewhat full/part-time personnel left for other HG related projects not part of DP9, along with the last few freelancers in 2013 as best I recall; it has been a long time since the same team worked on more than a single DP9 product.
If the KS fails, or goes wrong, then yes, in all likelihood what little of the company is left will be finished.
One question you should be asking is why have things come to that almost ''all or nothing'' impasse.
Another is; why are there so few potential employees and freelancers who're willing to work for the Pod, or even contribute to the Aurora e-fanzine.
Or how about; why are there so few employees and freelancers still working for the Pod from ten years back, if any, let alone previously associated folks who might have left on friendly terms.
bound for glory wrote: [..] What threw me was the talk of constantly "unbalanced"lists and books that never got finished.
Also, is there that much problem with their playtesters?
To my knowledge the only book ''finished'' (which few DP9 books actually are) more or less on schedule for the past, no idea really on the overall time frame but definitely more than five/six/seven years, was the Field Support Guide PDF.
The following book was the Northern PDF, which was gutted after turn-in to include a not playtested and undercosted Gear-Strider which followed a long string of similar models that required specifically tweaked stats to even function in gameplay.
The book before those was the Paxton PDF, which not only had gross power creep initially but received further (usually free) enhancements during each subsequent, and largely unsuccessful, supposedly error fixing ''edits''.
Probably the only HGB!-era book apart from the Field Support Guide that did not require significant edits or subsequent fixes was Drop Bears; and the FSG was almost entirely a collection of and updating for the Field Manuals of Gear-Up fixes to the L&L ruleset to close out OldBlitz.
Everything else talked about/planned, primarily for other factions and as yet unexplored (unpublished) colonies, during the L&L or Field Manual eras of HGB! was quietly dropped behind the scenes by the Pod.
Even if I assume that doing so is not the intention, and that it is just incompetence, DP9 playtesting methodology just results in confirmation bias.
I certainly think the process is flawed, and it feeds into some bad behaviors that aren't being compensated for. In particular the limited play-test pool, combined with a free-form process means everybody gets to bring their own perspective to the party. So instead of having 'playtesters' you end up with 'associate designers', which sounds great (you're collaborating!) but weakens a consistent vision of where the game should be. Hell I was surprised they took my ideals whole-cloth instead of imposing some common set of constraints, or making them confirm to their own vision.
And that is what I think is the worst flaw in the process - there's not a strong opinion on where the game should be. That lets it be pushed around back and forth by people with strong opinions (like me!), which is probably not a great thing in the balance. You need some flexibility with respect to your customers wishes, or otherwise you're missing valuable clues. But you should be starting from a strong point of 'where does the company need to go' and I'm not sure this latest edition started that way.
Even if I assume that doing so is not the intention, and that it is just incompetence, DP9 playtesting methodology just results in confirmation bias.
I certainly think the process is flawed, and it feeds into some bad behaviors that aren't being compensated for. In particular the limited play-test pool, combined with a free-form process means everybody gets to bring their own perspective to the party. So instead of having 'playtesters' you end up with 'associate designers', which sounds great (you're collaborating!) but weakens a consistent vision of where the game should be. Hell I was surprised they took my ideals whole-cloth instead of imposing some common set of constraints, or making them confirm to their own vision.
And that is what I think is the worst flaw in the process - there's not a strong opinion on where the game should be. That lets it be pushed around back and forth by people with strong opinions (like me!), which is probably not a great thing in the balance. You need some flexibility with respect to your customers wishes, or otherwise you're missing valuable clues. But you should be starting from a strong point of 'where does the company need to go' and I'm not sure this latest edition started that way.
Well, I was focusing on the testing methodology, since that's what I experienced first hand.
You are right for the lack of consistent and clear vision, but that's more of a design problem, and I have not experienced that part of DP9 first hand.
Essentially, what I saw is that, even if there is a temporary, designer specific vision that might or might not be relevant one year later, this vision will not be explained to the playtesters.
I guess i stand corrected.
I'm sorry for my ignorant comments. I had no clue the game or company were in such bad shape. I was looking at the game through the eye of the long time fan. I like the fluff, the models and for the most part, the game-play.
I guess if i sat down and really thought about the state of the game, i would have seen what you guys were on about.
No offense ment.
I highly doubt that after some reflection anyone here took anything you said as a personal or group attack.
I know, for myself anyways but probably a lot of others as well, that those of us labeled ''detractors'' started off with the exact same perspective until eventually something happened to shake belief and respect in the company making the game we so admired.
One big problem with Dream Pod 9 as a company, as a primary something that is often pointed out, is how there has always been so few folks who've even heard of their titles, meaning that a lot of the imperfections tend to get glossed over by enthusiasm instead of being fixed.
Another big factor happened during the run-up to Forged in Fire being released; TPTB in Pod-land clamped down much harder both publicly and privately than had previously been the case on what kinds of criticism or negative reactions they would allow to be voiced on venues they controlled.
For other venues, a number of folks tried to drown out what little factual information, truthful perspectives, or pragmatic and not so pragmatic impressions were being discussed apparently in case it ever got viewed by any of the silent majority.
The practical effect of that though seems to have been both groups mutually ignoring each other and consequently everyone involved being ignored in turn by those not already invested in the setting.
I think because of those considerations there is admittedly very little middle of the road evaluations about Heavy Gear to be found; instead folks will find equally small amounts of glowing praise and point by point condemnations.
Yet quite a lot of the time, simply due to popularity and member count, BGG/Dakka/etc etc are the forums most outsiders will go to first to see who's talking about a particular game, and what they have to say about it good or bad.
Over time I've come around to believe the point of view that the folks at the Pod have never quite understood that reality.
However, just because it's the internet and involves people in general, there will always be a significant percentage of folks who not only never post anywhere but never go looking for information in the first place before deciding whether or not to buy into something based on looks alone.
Knowing what the silent majority actually thinks, if those folks simply haven't give up on the game or setting entirely when they encounter something they don't like, almost never ends up being discussed.
In fact, the KS backer numbers might be the first real indication of the current exposure of HG and DP9, yet even a few of those who did comment are not planning to use either the setting or any DP9-published ruleset.
The sum takeaway of everything being discussed here or elsewhere still appears to be that while there is a lot to admire in the setting of HGthe company currently making it is facing a long hard road towards gaining an equal measure of status.
bound for glory wrote: I guess i stand corrected.
I'm sorry for my ignorant comments. I had no clue the game or company were in such bad shape. I was looking at the game through the eye of the long time fan. I like the fluff, the models and for the most part, the game-play.
I guess if i sat down and really thought about the state of the game, i would have seen what you guys were on about.
No offense ment.
No worries. ^_^ Unfortunately many of us have been doing this a long time.
I'm surprised your comments are still there, frankly. Alright looking at KS some more, it doesn't look like they can delete comments. There's some angry stuff there I imagine would be gone if it could. Unless a certain someone really HAS changed, and doesn't want to keep burying things like the old days.
Maybe grab a couple screenshots anyway, just in case. Calling upset customers "trolling" is worth being able to recall, I think.
@Firebreak - The Pod is now learning that they can't control the conversation on Kickstarter. They will have to ask KS to delete the comments, which likely can't happen until Monday morning, at the earliest.
Depending on my level of outrage, it may be worthwhile to demand public accountability - something that the Pod is not used to. ____
@Alpharius - a week ago, Dream Pod 9 "altered the deal," a la Palladium. The Pod unilaterally took it upon themselves to remove 2 of the models that they had promised to backers during the Kickstarter, replacing them with a few weapons bitz, rather than substituting them with other models. I've decided to call them on it, and they're obviously not happy about that.
Ah, well, people rarely respond well when they're called on stuff.
Still, I can't believe that they didn't 'spend' the money that they needed to as soon as they could in order to 'protect' against currency fluctuations, especially for stuff that was going to require USD.
They've also conveniently forgotten that at some point during the KS campaign itself they chose to restructure the reward levels in favor of the Caprician mounts, as well as tweaking something about the proposed retail backer box.
As originally started there was like an $18K stretch for the rulebook that in hindsight seems more like a buffer. (NSFW dArt site link.)
Dream Pod 9, about 2 hours ago, wrote:To all our supporters, unfortunately we can't control trolling here on Kickstarter. Wish Jay and Silent Bob were here to deal with this. ;-)
Creator Dream Pod 9 about 1 hour ago
... there are some haters out there.
This is the fundamental problem with DP9. I have seen it in private conversation with them too.
To them, criticism is not motivated by a desire to improve the game or fix a problem. It is motivated by a desire to complain.
If they get a lot of criticism from one person, it's not because that person cares about the game and wants it to improve, it's because that person hates them and the game, and wants it to fail.
I'm a bit surprised there hasn't been more of an attempt at spin control for Robert's "hater" message.
Who does something like that in the middle of a campaign exhorting folks to pledge money to the company they represent. [..]
JohnHwangDD wrote: Yeah, but then, had they communicated and gone through the motions of telling people in advance, soliciting backer feedback, all of this unpleasantness could have been avoided.
Yes, the Pod folks very definitely did not let slip that there were any problems of that nature on the horizon as they instead spent the first two weeks of the month dropping hints of how great everything was going to be in the near future.
Smilodon_UP wrote: The thing I'm actually most curious about is how long have TPTB in Pod-land known this was going to be an issue, because this decision is pretty much a total 180-degree change from the comments made after the last previous updates of substantial news.[..]
Yeah, but then, had they communicated and gone through the motions of telling people in advance, soliciting backer feedback, all of this unpleasantness could have been avoided. Instead, it's like they were expecting to be praised for shorting people 2 models.
As for whether they protected the money or not, their story is that they failed to account for something as basic as currency fluctionation. Naturally, that's grist for criticism.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Yeah, but then, had they communicated and gone through the motions of telling people in advance, soliciting backer feedback, all of this unpleasantness could have been avoided. Instead, it's like they were expecting to be praised for shorting people 2 models.
As for whether they protected the money or not, their story is that they failed to account for something as basic as currency fluctuation. Naturally, that's grist for criticism.
maceria wrote: [..] In addition to being terrible business.
I agree, that's fair - because in their repeated behavior TPTB actually do expect praise for every decision they make and unfortunately, more often than not, there is always some folks just waiting in the wings to give it no matter how things turn out later down the road.
But the problem with KS from what I've seen on all the campaigns I've followed is that it has too many ways to get around what few strictures are in place; instead, KS seems to reinforce if not reward companies doing their same old thing once more instead of adapting/changing for the better.
The Lesson of the Holiday Roast
Mmmpi wrote: So what ever happened to the whole "if it doesn't work out, we'll make it up with metal models" that got brought up during the KS?
Ah, I had forgotten about Dave promising that before, but sounds like doing so has been amended now to only be on the table if backers want to pay almost full retail price - folks can save $3CAD per model provided they add-on a two pack of either type to get that offering.
Firebreak wrote: If the plastics company tanks, say, then the backers get all their minis from the KS in metal or resin without any added cost? Hell, that sounds fair to me. I mean, I'd prefer even bad plastic to metal, but still, that's a decent disaster scenario plan.
It would suck Armadillo Beast to have to do that but yeah, in case of Act of God, we have a backup plan that we'd prefer never to use.
It's always better to have a plan and not need it, than it is to need a plan and not have it.
I always wonder how much earthquake insurance companies operating in China have to keep...
Cheers!
Dave
DP9Dave wrote: From what I can tell about the Robotech kickstarter, since I am not a backer, is that they realized going into production that the planned level of articulation would take up a lot more space for parts in their molds than they had planned. Then it sounds like they got stuck in morass of dealing with overseas production issues. It's been bewildering trying to figure out what exactly went wrong there but a lot of money like that means that they probably had to scale up production to a much higher level than they thought they needed to at first. It sounds like they are in the process of shipping out to backers and are being given the run around by customs. It's clear that they've had a lot of unexpected problems but that happens, people get their stuff, and life goes on. 85000 comment is however a lot of comments...
How can we produce as much as we are planning in the time frame, in the quantity required?
By listening to the guidance of our plastics producer, who we have a very close relationship to now. We know we're inexperienced, so we're getting the guys with the best expertise we can on our side. They think that November 2015 for delivery of the rewards is ludicrous, they expect to be up and running much faster than that. They're used to much faster turnaround speeds than that and they are appalled at the length of time other kickstarters have taken to ship.
We used the numbers we were given by the best experts we could find and then added a healthy safety margin to be sure. Plus we started designing our 3D models only after finding the tolerances and discussing how many parts to make them in and how they would cast with the most detail. Most companies that I can see start with a raw digital model, then go to manufacturing and get laughed at for what they are trying to do and have a long process of redesign and review. We've sidestepped all that with planning, something we're getting better with all the time.
The assurance you have that we can produce?
You have the best assurance possible. You have the assurance that we still want to be in business after the rewards ship.
We know that it's no good creating these expectations and then not meeting them. But we also know that there's going to be problems. Problems happen. And we'll solve them. And what we learn from the process will make future crowd funding projects we do run smoother and better than this one. None of these models are something that we can't produce in metal or resin and even if disaster hits and the molds are destroyed by Godzilla there will be insurance and we'll be able to fix the problem by re-making the molds or in a pinch we can produce in metal or resin as a last resort. Unlike some companies who have no backup production we know that come hell or high water these models are getting made if we have to do them ourselves, again, as a last resort.
Cheers!
Dave
DP9, 5 days ago, wrote:[..] This money can't be refunded as the majority of it is being used to make the plastic injection molds and have the plastics popped for the Backer Reward Packages.
[..] Now all that being said, we can't do refunds, but we can make available special orders for the Dream Pod 9 Online Store. If there are no other Add-ons in the pledge manager that interest you as replacements to the plastic Tiger and Sidewinder sprues Add-ons which are no longer available. [..] We can do a special conversion rate of the $USD DP9 Online Store price plus 15% converted in to $CAD (instead of the 43% it is right now) for our Kickstarter Backers. So for example if you had $24 CAD available in the the pledge manager it would make $20.87 USD ($24CAD/1.15) in products from the DP9 Online Store, ... We would put a note on your pledge manager account to add the DP9 Online Store products to your Backer Reward Package when it ships and remove the amount in $CAD from your pledge manager account.
Update #110 on Jan 21, 2016 [..] We have updated the Pledge Manager, adding 3D Models with Parts Sprues and updated various images. Plus we have added a few new options to the Add-ons as well, a Rock Terrain color sheet for $2 CAD each and the Chibi Kodiak that was our 2015 DP9 Online Store Xmas gift for $30 CAD each. Plus, the option for Backers who still want Tigers and Sidewinders to get our older Pewter miniature two pack versions instead, at a special price of $20 CAD each. The normal price of these pewter miniature two packs is $17.99 USD (about $26 CAD) on the DP9 Online Store.
Update #111 on Jan 28, 2016 [..] Lastly we still have about 45 Backers with the plastic Tiger and Sidewinder models selected as Add-ons in the Pledge Manager. As our previous updated stated the plastic Tiger and Sidewinders models are no longer available and we need everyone to login to their pledge manager accounts at the link below and remove any plastic Tigers or Sidewinders and select other Add-ons in their place.
I wonder if DP9 realizes it has been over a year since the KS ended, with three months gone since delivery was supposed to happen, and a number of folks have probably forgotten or lost interest by now.
Also, ''majority'' (my bolding) does not equal all, and refunding the folks who did add-on some number of Tigers & Sidewinders yet don't want any other product(s) shouldn't eat that much into funds left in reserve to cover shipping increases or the like.
JohnHwangDD wrote: As expected, they've reported me for Trolling.
I've reported them for name calling.
ETA - there are a *LOT* more White Knights than I had expected. Oh, well...
There is also potentially the issue of what right any creator has on a KS to reveal what should probably be privileged information regarding the amount of monies pledged by a backer.
Dream Pod 9, about 15 hours ago, wrote:@ Juliet Hwang. We want to thank you for your support of the Kickstarter with your $1 pledge. And sharing your feelings and concerns, that you are so put out by the changes we made to ensure that we are able to deliver a balanced Core Starter Set to all our Amazing Backers, that pledged for one or more of them.
Firebreak wrote: I'm surprised your comments are still there, frankly. Alright looking at KS some more, it doesn't look like they can delete comments. There's some angry stuff there I imagine would be gone if it could. Unless a certain someone really HAS changed, and doesn't want to keep burying things like the old days.
Maybe grab a couple screenshots anyway, just in case. Calling upset customers "trolling" is worth being able to recall, I think.
Heh. Guess that's not it, no:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alpharius wrote: Ah, well, people rarely respond well when they're called on stuff.
Still, I can't believe that they didn't 'spend' the money that they needed to as soon as they could in order to 'protect' against currency fluctuations, especially for stuff that was going to require USD.
Yeah... that's the thing. It is pretty unbelievable. At the very least, mighty strange. One would think the manufacturer would have wanted to be paid at least in part before committimg.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Smilodon_UP wrote: There is also potentially the issue of what right any creator has on a KS to reveal what should probably be privileged information regarding the amount of monies pledged by a backer.
Dream Pod 9, about 15 hours ago, wrote:@ Juliet Hwang. We want to thank you for your support of the Kickstarter with your $1 pledge. And sharing your feelings and concerns, that you are so put out by the changes we made to ensure that we are able to deliver a balanced Core Starter Set to all our Amazing Backers, that pledged for one or more of them.
It's not the first time that the Pod has threatened with that. A... year ago, maybe? Robert PMed me to threaten with "outing me" for backing $1 because I was being "tiresome", apparently, with my lack of support.
Of course, I already had said as much myself everywhere, so as threats go, that one did not have much teeth.
So, I generally expect to write off everything sent to KS. News of the model line up change was bothersome, but, eh, it's KS.
This behavior from DP9 however is beyond unacceptable. The bullying and intimidation, as well as using private information to do so, is disgusting on any level, and reprehensible from a business.
Needless to say I have reported this to KS, for sweet FA it will do.
I hope when the lawsuits go through that DP9 goes under, and the IP gets auctioned to a company that doesn't threaten upset customers with lawyers. Maybe Catalyst?
Glad I didn't sign up for this. Got interested in HG a few years back based on how the models looked. Ordered the pdf rules and when I visited their forum, I saw open hostility towards the players from the company.
That stopped me cold.
It was in email. So yeah, keeping it. Also as advised by legal people, I'm not going to discuss this in public. Nothing personal ladies and gents if I am concise in then future.
Hmm, yeah, a prime example of what can happen when everyone involved doesn't take a moment to consider before hitting the send button. I apologize on behalf of Dream Pod 9 for our side, this isn't easy for us either as you can imagine.
Considering the amount of time that Robert has put into the kickstarter since it began (120+ hours a week at least, at all hours to co-ordinate with artists and other people all over the world) it is no small thing that the only issues with fulfillment are manageable ones. And yes, losing two models is only an issue since it hasn't prevented the vast majority of the KS going forward.
Some backers have been complaining about things that could have been dealt with in other ways, and in hindsight they could have, but you deal with problems as they actually are, not as hypothetical issues, and time mocks all decisions given enough time. The currency issue was a bad one and we had always planned that it could get bad for us, just never this bad, and for so long. In the end mistakes were made and hard lessons learned, such as how we should have been buying USD earlier to guard against fluctuations. It's a perfect storm of a government that doubled down on the oil economy and international commodity trading that few people could have predicted. Lesson learned.
The thing that bothers me is that people automatically consider that we can just switch up the plastic models for metal. When you consider the cost of the materials that decision would kill the kickstarter dead, so that is not possible.
When the kickstarter was on I made the point that unlike most miniatures kick starters we actually have an in-house production facility and that if there was a disaster such as the molds falling off the transport ship and ending up a the bottom of the ocean then at the vary least we would be able to produce some kind of replacement ourselves using the insurance money. With many companies there would never be the possibility of this so advantage to us, but it doesn't help in a situation like this.
Frankly I'm amazed at how much has gone _Right_ in this kickstarter considering that it was our first, and how steep the learning curve was. Some kickstarters don't overcome these challenges and flop. We're getting our molds made and getting rewards out to the backers in a reasonable time frame. A big shout out of thanks to our backers who have stayed positive through it all, I know it's hard sometimes. Imagine being in the trenches through this making these decisions and be glad you don't have to be the one to make them.
These might not be the answers that backers and other are looking for but it's what I have to give right now.
Killionaire wrote: [..] Now onto the negatives. They're bad. I mean real bad.
[..] Likewise, when something cool does come out, it's not marketted right. Even fans of the game don't see anything on most gaming news sites, nothing on their frontpage, and need to instead dive into some obscure forum threads for basic information like that a new unit box came out.
It also doesn't help that the company's book editing is poor, and schedules slip a lot. And that they don't like it when called on it.
MrThud wrote: I own a HG:B army and an occasional player versus two other opponents in my area. I've stopped really playing the game for quite some time, though I do lurk on the forums and post every once in a while. There's a few reasons I've stopped buying models.
1. Lack of company support for its ruleset
This is a glaring one. For years the company provided zero rules support. Any sort of rules question was essentially being pitched into a black hole. Then, after a protracted, heated argument last year about just how poorly written the Heavy Gear rules are (prompted by a new player basically asking how good the rules are), the company announced there would be a forum specifically for answering rules questions. Weekly answers were provided, which was great. It lasted three or four weeks, then the person in charge just flat out stopped answering. No official word on why he stopped, no questions about if rules support are over are answered. This wouldn't be so much a problem if the rules were well written and edited, but they're in a state I would consider barely adequate.
How can you take a game seriously if the developers themselves don't seem to care about it themselves? You get the feeling that DP9 is operating primarily as a model-making company, with the actual game behind the models a distant second.
2. Lack of transparency
This one's closely related to the first, but any communication with the company is largely one way. They announce new releases, then will have a spurt of activity where they will answer feedback, then it reverts to the "no questions, please" mode. You get the occasional comment that they monitor the forums closely, but why don't they chime in with comments more often? It gives the appearance that the people on the forums have more invested in the game than the developers themselves. [..]
mrondeau wrote: [..] The first one is that DP9's attitude is reinforced and enabled by the fans. It's easier to ignore the people pointing out the problems when you have a group of fans telling you that your work is perfect and that all your problems are caused by the complainers. That's what we observed during LnL's playtest.
mrondeau wrote: [..] Also, what make you think that we did not start by making suggestions in private ? Let me re-put things in perspective: we reported game-killing problems and were not just ignored, we were denigrated as "complainers". During a playtest.
[..] That same attitude, from what I saw at the beginning of the playtest for FiF and what I heard of the other playtests, is still present.
Problems should be ignored, not reported. The only issue is those that report problems. DP9 still does it, you are doing it right now and here. I won't speculate as to why DP9 still think like that, even after changing part of the team. All I know is that it's still there. That's why I say "DP9": even if some of the individual are replaced, the attitude is still there.
MrThud wrote: [..] In the recent past DP9 has been unresponsive to player feedback on their current rules. That's just the view of a regular player too, let alone one who's been involved in any sort of playtesting capacity. I just have trouble seeing them do a sudden 180 and give the sort of attention to feedback that would be needed to properly test and implement a clean set of rules.
Albertorius wrote: So, it's nice to know some things just don't ever change.
Over at DP9, Robert has posted an announcement for their new pie in the sky proyect: a hopper model, the first in a new whole line of them I guess. You would see there are no replies to that post.
But there were. Two, in fact, one mine and one from Robock (...I think). I said that it was too expensive for me, and that even though I could not benefit from them (as buying from the USA/Canada right now is too expensive), the price reduction on the bundles was a good idea. Oh, and I also said that the peg was waaay too low. Robocks' was similar I think (EDIT: No, I remember now: he didn't know if he would ever want more than one because the Pod has yet to release the north book, I think). Both got deleted in a matter of minutes.
Then I posted again, asking what was so offensive about my post to have it deleted. This one got deleted too, and I got a PM from Robert, basically telling me that if I had nothing good to say about their prices I'd better say nothing. And that they didn't manufacture from China as many others, so that was why their prices are "a bit more expensive".
For starters, none of the companies I compared DP9's prices (all 15mm instead of 12, BTW) manufacture from China. All of them manufacture themselves. Also, it's not "a bit" more expensive. We're talking about twice or even 4 times as expensive here. So there.
RJVF wrote: [..] DP9 has many issues as a company, most of which can be fixed. There just does not seem to exist the will to fix them. Which disappoints me, because I like the world, I like the aesthetics and scale of the minis, and - believe it or not - I kind of like the core mechanic of Blitz. The game has a niche in the market that nobody else is really competing with in theme and scale, and should be able to grow from that. Just kind of sad they do not seem to be able or willing to do it.
warboss wrote: I imagine Smilodon will do the same thing after his cooling rods contain the reaction. edit: From the free preview table of contents on DTRPG
Actually, my first response to reading the table of contents on that DTRPG preview was to laugh myself silly for about ~five minutes or so.
Because, after getting told by Saleem that I had insulted Robert by telling him he was wrong, and why he was wrong, about many of his mandated decisions made without consultation I see that most all of the silly put into the book by Saleem that he wouldn't let anyone touch got removed by Robert anyways. [..]
Twelvecarpileup wrote: [..] I know I'm essentially saying:
"I would play Heavy Gear if it wasn't Heavy Gear".
IceRaptor wrote: [..] I'm just sad that so many people have been burned out from such a vibrant setting. The squandered opportunity is simply depressing.
Twelvecarpileup wrote: I personally think this is a huge mistake... you're not going to get many players in with just the rulebook.
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: [..]at least you find out if there is any real interest in your game any more (which from the sound of the thread is open to question)
[..] You'll notice in his posts or video interviews that he waxes more than a touch grandiose when talking about the company's following or exposure.
Firebreak wrote: It's not that this Kickstarter is a bad idea, it's that it's a ridiculous idea. The company is 20 years old for sake. They should be able to put out a new edition of a game nearly that old on their own dime. The only reason the Pod SHOULD have for going to Kickstarter, is to overhaul their minis. They shouldn't need to crowdfund STAFF. I love Heavy Gear, I really do. The setting is amazing, the art is amazing, and the minis are pretty cool. But holy damn, DP9, could you start acting like professionals for five minutes?
Just wanted to vent.
[..] DP9, on the other hand, has had continuous new releases, new games, new rule books, etc... On the surface, there's no reason to think that they're anything other than a healthy company, and seemingly have been that way since they killed all but one of their lines back in the '90s. But if that's the case, then why are they turning to crowd sourcing for the new rules?
ferrous wrote: [..] Especially when they already had, or had already announced Arena, and it's rules ended up being utter gak. Like completely unplayable, and it was also completely left to twist in the wind. I don't think they ever answered a single rules question about that game. (And there were loads)
I also don't mind outdated gears, and odd mixes and matches of different gears, but they never did a very good job of balancing them. It was more of a way to handicap yourself by taking the wrong gear. So terrible.
There is a beta edition out for the new edition of Heavy Gear. I haven't read the entire thing yet, but when I'm talking to Robert D. at Gencon and the most exciting thing he can talk about is that you don't have to track ammo anymore in the new edition... well, there went my high hopes.
Robert's a damn fool; thats what he mentioned? I swear every time I think that man can't screw up his company any more than he already has, he says something stupid like that. [..]
Balance wrote: [..] I have tried to make the point to the TPTB that shutting down a conversation on a forum doesn't kill the conversation, it just moves it elsewhere. Where there's no real way to respond, at least.
plastictrees wrote: Just wanted to jump in to say that as a new player who picked up $350 or so of NuCoal in the last year, I really don't see myself playing any more than the two games I've got in early this year.
The new edition just seems like a horrible quagmire, the company is giving off a ton of warning signs and, honestly, there are so many other options for gaming out there right now that I don't feel the need to send good time and money after bad.
Just thought I'd share the perspective of what was a new player.
mrondeau wrote: [..] Then, I learned how much DP9 cares about its customers.
If creating the official change log was going to take time, I suggested just posting my log as an unofficial post (what I was planning to do in the first place.)
Instead, I was told to wait. So I waited.
After 1-2 weeks, I asked about the status, and offered help. I was told to wait.
After 1-2 weeks, I asked about the status, and offered help. I was told to wait, it was going to be done soon.
After 1-2 weeks, I asked about the status, and offered help. I was told it was ready and would be posted next Friday.
I offered to look at it, to confirm that my questions were answered. No reply.
Friday come. No change logs. I ask what's going on. No Reply.
During the weekend, someone ask the question. I'm tired of waiting and not answering, so I post my original text.
I warn DP9, saying that it's obviously taking them longer than expected, and that I'm tired of waiting (probably less politely than that, I'll admit.)
Within 30-60 seconds (I checked the timestamps), my post is deleted, and I have an angry PM in my inbox, from the owner who apparently was under the mistaken impression that he was my boss.
It took a few more months for the change log. The final results was, mostly, my original text. The answers did not actually answers the questions, and in fact indicated that the author did not understand the rules.
Albertorius wrote: [..] It's not the first time that the Pod has threatened with that. A... year ago, maybe? Robert PMed me to threaten with "outing me" for backing $1 because I was being "tiresome", apparently, with my lack of support.
Of course, I already had said as much myself everywhere, so as threats go, that one did not have much teeth.
maceria wrote: [..] This behavior from DP9 however is beyond unacceptable. The bullying and intimidation, as well as using private information to do so, is disgusting on any level, and reprehensible from a business.
Needless to say I have reported this to KS, for sweet FA it will do.
maceria wrote: ...and RD just threatened me with lawyers.
n815e wrote: Glad I didn't sign up for this. Got interested in HG a few years back based on how the models looked. Ordered the pdf rules and when I visited their forum, I saw open hostility towards the players from the company.
That stopped me cold.
DP9Dave wrote: [..] The issues with the North book were regrettable but both sides could have communicated better and shown more patience. [..] I wish we could have worked this out earlier but at the time it was not possible. I wish you could have been more patient since on the whole your work was excellent.
DP9Dave wrote: Hmm, yeah, a prime example of what can happen when everyone involved doesn't take a moment to consider before hitting the send button. I apologize on behalf of Dream Pod 9 for our side, this isn't easy for us either as you can imagine. [..]
Since everyone is being so honest, the major part of the problem is that the source of most of those problems has been and continues to be on the company's side of the fence.
I.E. all of those occasions where: Folks don't like something? - then they obviously aren't true fans.
Folks aren't buying enough? - then they are too picky, and not loyal enough.
Folks are offering a solution or their own time to fix a product? - then they are being overly critical.
Folks are offering unsolicited criticisms? - then they're just trolling.
Folks are complaining behind the scenes? - then they're just too impatient and can be ignored/banned/what have you.
Folks are complaining in public? - then they should be labeled as our enemies and/or threatened with legal action..... while we keep implying our budget is continually stretched to the limit.
Folks are bringing up mistakes we keep making? - then they want us to fail.
Folks are unhappy with an unexplained and contrary executive decision? - then they just need to shut up and accept it.
Folks are right, or at least a whole lot more realistic, about something when we are obviously wrong? - then they cannot have been right in the first place, because that is a state of affairs that can never happen.
Seeing a pattern of behavior here leading to a business practice that has in turn significantly contributed to the sorry state DP9 has found itself in?
Y'all keep promising to turn over a new leaf time and again rather than repeat the past decade+ of problems; instead it seems like you are the only one at the Pod even giving that ideal lip service.
(Hopefully) enough said; because those things Robert keeps doing that you've (or another employee/fan before you) tried to explain now and in the past as just momentary lapses of judgment on his part? - they can't be easily taken back, if at all.
DP9Dave wrote: [..] Considering the amount of time that Robert has put into the kickstarter since it began (120+ hours a week at least, at all hours to co-ordinate with artists and other people all over the world) it is no small thing that the only issues with fulfillment are manageable ones.
Likewise, it probably isn't a good thing to even be appearing to try and play a card out of Palladium's deck.
Alpharius wrote: 120+ hour work weeks are...insane and unsustainable.
There are only 168 hours in a week!
Yeah, I don't really understand how he's managed to keep it up plus keeping the regular company goings on. He's had to take a couple of short breaks but when it's go time we work all hours to get it done. I try to take on some of the duties as much as possible but we're a small operation and it's just a case of constant updates and interruptions that can happen at any time of day or night. I'm probably exaggerating the 120+ hours a week at just the kickstarter, it's probably 80% kickstarter and 20% DP9. Kickstarters are definitely not a way to get rich quick - we're working extra hard now on the idea that we can improve the situation around production costs for the long term sustainability of the company. All I know is that he's up working first thing in the morning and still at it late at night. This kind of work can have a brutal schedule with a lot of flurries of 3D models getting flung back and forth to Europe, Asia, and other places. Time zones are not business hours friendly.
musing/
I'm also sure that every game company producing in metal right now is looking at plastic as the only way forward. Look how GW dropped it completely and how Privateer Press is transitioning as quick as they are, with even Privateer Press starting on their own kickstarter. I would be very surprised to still see metal gaming products still available in five years time. Resin and plastic will rule the tables in the future for certain. How sustainable tabletop gaming is in the long term will probably depend on this more than anything.
/musing
DP9Dave wrote: How sustainable tabletop gaming is in the long term
The actual gaming will be very sustainable, and even easier and cheaper for people to access. Because as soon as I can print my own spacemen at home... Well, let's not pretend there's any control over rulebooks, anymore. And that hasn't destroyed gaming, just like it didn't destroy music. But it (and ebooks) have put us at a point where if you want anyone to buy your (paper) books, you've got to be offering something at least nice, if not special.
How sustainable it will be as a business? Companies are going to have to figure that part out, and let's just add this in to be brutally honest: The first one to blame the players - for whatever - will be the first one to die and be forgotten.
Even once 3D printers are good - and currently they're just "good enough...ish" - companies with molds are still going to be able to offer a better product. And then once 3D printers match (and theoretically/eventually pass) molding, companies are going to be able to offer a somewhat better product, because they'll have artists and actual designers working for them. For a while. But when the artists start selling their own designs to people directly, that's when things are really going to change. Tabletop gaming could look very similar to the music industry, and it could all come down to who figures out the "Tabletop gaming iTunes" first.
Maybe we'll see Games Workshop go back to selling other people's stuff, like in the distant past, just in a different way.
DP9Dave wrote: How sustainable tabletop gaming is in the long term
The actual gaming will be very sustainable, and even easier and cheaper for people to access. Because as soon as I can print my own spacemen at home... Well, let's not pretend there's any control over rulebooks, anymore. And that hasn't destroyed gaming, just like it didn't destroy music. But it (and ebooks) have put us at a point where if you want anyone to buy your (paper) books, you've got to be offering something at least nice, if not special.
How sustainable it will be as a business? Companies are going to have to figure that part out, and let's just add this in to be brutally honest: The first one to blame the players - for whatever - will be the first one to die and be forgotten.
Even once 3D printers are good - and currently they're just "good enough...ish" - companies with molds are still going to be able to offer a better product. And then once 3D printers match (and theoretically/eventually pass) molding, companies are going to be able to offer a somewhat better product, because they'll have artists and actual designers working for them. For a while. But when the artists start selling their own designs to people directly, that's when things are really going to change. Tabletop gaming could look very similar to the music industry, and it could all come down to who figures out the "Tabletop gaming iTunes" first.
Maybe we'll see Games Workshop go back to selling other people's stuff, like in the distant past, just in a different way.
Well anyone who can predict that future first will do very well. We might even see more situations where IPs are licensed like Star Wars is to Fantasy Flight Games. Their Armada and X-Wing games have proven that pre-painted figures can sell at a significant price if the quality is there. I think we could argue that 3D printers, especially the UV laser ones, are probably already high enough quality. If I were to bet I would assume that we'll see co-ops where designers, artists, and writers get together for a crowdfunded campaign then from there on it will be a trust economy where people will support the co-ops through a patreon system or a subscription. It does make a lot of sense to cut the transport costs out of the equation if possible. Ironically this may save a lot of companies since they will no longer need to do stock management. Game stores will probably have the higher end machines and charge for the miniatures that their customers want with a set price like $1-$2 going to the company for use of the 3D master. There would be no secondary market, you would just sell your figures back to the store for a credit on your next printing and the store would toss the material back into the hopper to be ground up or melted down again. Again who knows, we were supposed to have flying cars by now too but that proved impractical.
I still have some White Dwarfs with Judge Dredd figures and other company ads in it. The weird old days of gaming indeed.
-Dave
FFG and their pre-painted minis is a very good point. If I didn't have to paint Tau, good lord would Games Workshop have so much more of my money. They might be gently nudging towards that right now, in fact, with the new starter kits made with colored plastic.
I don't know if, in our lifetimes, we'll get to a point where at-home 3D printing can compete with professional stuff (/molding) for a sane price, but it is going to happen one day. (Of course, that will/could change a lot more than mini gaming.)
DP9Dave wrote: [..] The currency issue was a bad one and we had always planned that it could get bad for us, just never this bad, and for so long. In the end mistakes were made and hard lessons learned, such as how we should have been buying USD earlier to guard against fluctuations.
There is some truth to all that; yet there would probably have been less flap had that information not been sat on for so long as things drug on the past year+, nor did it help the situation much any that barely two weeks ago you were still posting hype saying everything was going perfectly.
DP9Dave wrote: [..] The thing that bothers me is that people automatically consider that we can just switch up the plastic models for metal. When you consider the cost of the materials that decision would kill the kickstarter dead, so that is not possible.
When the kickstarter was on I made the point that unlike most miniatures kick starters we actually have an in-house production facility and that if there was a disaster such as the molds falling off the transport ship and ending up a the bottom of the ocean then at the vary least we would be able to produce some kind of replacement ourselves using the insurance money. With many companies there would never be the possibility of this so advantage to us, but it doesn't help in a situation like this.
Again, due to scale, there is some truth to all that, nevertheless it still caught you having intimated something a bit different back during the KS.
However.... Offering small refund amounts for those few backers who absolutely do not want any other add-ons or DP9 store merchandise in place of either their Tigers or Sidewinders could not possibly have been that great a total loss.
Potentially, there is also the additional benefit of avoiding some, or maybe even quite a lot, of the ill will such a fiat engendered, whether that disappointment was voiced or not.
The decision to offer a rather pitiful, almost insulting really, discount on a two-pack of either (but not oddly enough the single blister, unless it simply was not mentioned) Gear makes it look as if no funds period can be spared after stating only a majority had been spent on the molds.
Unlike in the past Robert truly needs to understand (or be made to understand) that if folks, be they backers or potential customers, don't like something or don't want something then he will have to accept that fact and be done with the issue.
Something like cost (time & resources) plus only a 15-25% mark-up on each two-pack of models might have been a more reasonable offering for those willing to take advantage of it, so that it was still at an attractive price point compared to what was dropped from the KS box.
Overall, I think the manner in which this was handled comes across as a thinly veiled cash grab following already having spent what funds were pledged by the backers.
DP9Dave wrote: [..] musing/
I'm also sure that every game company producing in metal right now is looking at plastic as the only way forward.
Approximately what percentage of the overall KS funds pledged has been earmarked for any potential bulk discount on the total number of ''pops'' produced (above that of the KS backers) that are intended solely to fill retail boxes for the warehouse.
Because even though backers have to pay all the S&H/customs/VAT associated with their reward(s), it does not sound at all like the Pod has enough funds in reserve after redoing most of the 3D sculpts to try and spend the rest gambling on an industry exposure that may not or does not match reality.
There just may not be that many gamers or potential gamers out there willing to take a chance on the title, and there is surely a whole lot of competition for whatever disposable $$$ their budget will support.
Playing it safe may be the wiser course of action; if [X] amount of funds are spent to produce an overabundance of retail boxes y'all simply can't ask for it back afterwards if the product doesn't move fast enough to bring in any worthwhile profit.
So, to Dave: I'm the one who brought up the "metal instead" in this thread. My misunderstanding I guess. I just figured that this was one of those thing that DP9's "promise" covered.
The point you made about an actual disaster, such as the ship with everything on it sinking is perfectly fine, you just weren't as clear back a couple years ago when it was said. (or I'm remembering wrong)
One of the little irritants though with the change is that I'm loosing two models (4 because I'm getting two starters). -1 TIger, and -1 sidewinder, +1 acco (whole thing x2). That isn't counting the three I had as add-ons. Sure I'm getting some guns, but based on the sprues shown, I'm getting the weapons I want already.
Now I understand that things happen, and I'm not mad, just a bit worried. The KS is already 3 months behind, and falling farther, granted for what I feel is a good reason, and now this.
Yeah, it was in case they were unable to deliver on the plastics, such as the tools sinking to the bottom of the Pacific.
In the great scheme of things it's a couple of miniatures, and it's not like it's a pre-order. The whole point of Kickstarter is to support a business so it can get going. They can give incentives and whatnot, but the idea is that we give them money and hopefully they stay in business; if we received some products in return then that's even better.
People that pledge $1 so they can be rude about it, well, I don't know what to say about that. I suppose every dollar helps.
Nomeny wrote: People that pledge $1 so they can be rude about it, well, I don't know what to say about that. I suppose every dollar helps.
I don't think anyone pledged $1.00 CAD just so they can be rude about it but rather they likely only pledged that much because they were worried there would be preventable and forseeable complications like this one that would negatively impact their pledge. I personally don't think that the negative changes made to the deal are significant enough to warrant the reaction they are getting but each person sees the situation differently. I suppose my reaction would be harsher had I pledged more than $1 especially if I had done so specifically for Polar forces.
Nomeny wrote: People that pledge $1 so they can be rude about it, well, I don't know what to say about that. I suppose every dollar helps.
I don't think anyone pledged $1.00 CAD just so they can be rude about it but rather they likely only pledged that much because they were worried there would be preventable and forseeable complications like this one that would negatively impact their pledge. I personally don't think that the negative changes made to the deal are significant enough to warrant the reaction they are getting but each person sees the situation differently. I suppose my reaction would be harsher had I pledged more than $1 especially if I had done so specifically for Polar forces.
This. I pledged $1 because I was interested but not convinced, and the further development didn't sell me enough to upgrade it.
Nomeny wrote: [..] The whole point of Kickstarter is to support a business so it can get going. They can give incentives and whatnot, but the idea is that we give them money and hopefully they stay in business; if we received some products in return then that's even better.
You pledge and then you get the rewards at whatever level you pledged.
There is no ''if'', period; because if a company is not obligated to give you anything then you have made a donation and not a pledge.
And while supporting their business may on some levels be the point of them doing a KS, from what I've seen in practice most companies/creators only end up collecting enough to offer a limited set of items that can't otherwise be produced with existing resources.
If in the end it turns out the company is solvent enough that it can take advantage of a new manufacturing process or single product and keep offering either in the future, well, that is not always something that can be foreseen no matter the intent.
There were good reasons I asked Dave earlier on this page about funding going towards ''pops'' intended only for the distribution or warehousing of retail boxes; primarily because from the Pod's own comments there doesn't seem to be enough left over in the KS take/budget to do that.
DP9Dave wrote: [..] musing/
I'm also sure that every game company producing in metal right now is looking at plastic as the only way forward.
Approximately what percentage of the overall KS funds pledged has been earmarked for any potential bulk discount on the total number of ''pops'' produced (above that of the KS backers) that are intended solely to fill retail boxes for the warehouse. [..]
By collecting the funds, DP9 is now obligated to reward their backers, but if insufficient funds are left to produce retail stock then quite simply the Pod will have to accept that not enough is left and retail boxes aren't going to happen.
Nomeny wrote: People that pledge $1 so they can be rude about it, well, I don't know what to say about that. I suppose every dollar helps.
I don't think anyone pledged $1.00 CAD just so they can be rude about it but rather they likely only pledged that much because they were worried there would be preventable and forseeable complications like this one that would negatively impact their pledge. [..]
This. I pledged $1 because I was interested but not convinced, and the further development didn't sell me enough to upgrade it.
I guess we've circled back to that ''just give them $$$ and everything'll work out'' meta again....
Can't find an opponent locally? - take advantage of [this] bundled sale to get you everything one player needs to play.
Can't get anyone to play the game? - take advantage of [this] sale on the [current] ruleset, which will have an errata, FAQ, and (another) edit soon; we promise.
Your army list got invalidated by the [current] ruleset? - buy [these] new more expensive models, some of which are in [this] sale btw, to fix it by fielding completely different types of combat groups for which you'll also need [these] models.
Don't like the plastic KS sculpts, or don't need any more of those models? - pledge $115CAD anyways.
Don't like the computer game, where almost no one is ever on to play against, being made by a company whose own future is in doubt? - drop the $$$ anyways, because hey, it's only another $40USD.
Mmmpi wrote: So, to Dave: I'm the one who brought up the "metal instead" in this thread. My misunderstanding I guess. I just figured that this was one of those thing that DP9's "promise" covered.
The point you made about an actual disaster, such as the ship with everything on it sinking is perfectly fine, you just weren't as clear back a couple years ago when it was said. (or I'm remembering wrong)
One of the little irritants though with the change is that I'm loosing two models (4 because I'm getting two starters). -1 TIger, and -1 sidewinder, +1 acco (whole thing x2). That isn't counting the three I had as add-ons. Sure I'm getting some guns, but based on the sprues shown, I'm getting the weapons I want already.
Now I understand that things happen, and I'm not mad, just a bit worried. The KS is already 3 months behind, and falling farther, granted for what I feel is a good reason, and now this.
Well the molds are being made right now. We'll have updates as we get them for you. They should be done by March. At this point we're still looking at the production run for fundraising fulfillment happening before April. As things progress we will adjust. As we've said all along, we'd rather take a little extra time and get it right than rush it. I'm happy that we're only three months late at this point. Getting all the backer rewards out by the end of June is starting to look very possible with the Wave 1 being shipped in April if all goes without a hitch (Knock wood). AS I've said, not an ideal situation, but not enough to sideline the project.
Wasn't the whole thing supposed to designed and made in the US ? I remember DP9 very proudly boasting about this, and how it'd make things much easier by staying on the same continent.
I certainly don't remember any mention of a Chinese company in there...
Correct. Plastic Production will be done with an American company on the mainland USA. The molds are made in China since that is where you have to go to get molds like this made at a cost effective price. The US company we are working with exclusively makes their molds in China.
Wait, do you mean I could have had strippers instead? Damnnn. Well that boat sailed a long time ago. I'm joking of course, I would have spent that money on filling my basement with dice three feet deep.
Nomeny wrote: In-progress photos of the mold plates are up!
Now if only the renders that got used to cut them had been like the very few examples shown during the KS campaign, then the Pod could have garnered another few hundred $$$ from at least one person, what with the pledge manager still being open and all.
But of course since the crappy barely even toy-like designs were considered ''good enough'' by the Pod for this, we can all certainly know what to expect from any similar projects should any be offered in the future; just imagine the renders if less money got collected.
HudsonD wrote: Wasn't the whole thing supposed to designed and made in the US ? I remember DP9 very proudly boasting about this, and how it'd make things much easier by staying on the same continent.
I certainly don't remember any mention of a Chinese company in there...
DP9Dave wrote: [..] The molds are made in China since that is where you have to go to get molds like this made at a cost effective price. The US company we are working with exclusively makes their molds in China.
Yeah, as far as I can find out searching back posts and threads here or elsewhere that part was never specifically mentioned at all.
In fact, China was made mention of by Dave only one time here, in relation to whether or not companies there need earthquake insurance.
So no, there was no transparency on that issue.
About the same really as how almost an entire month later both Dave and Robert are still ducking the question that cutting enough unlocked models to not make a sixth steel mold was anything more than padding the budget towards producing retail boxes a la Palladium Books.
The decision clearly never had any consideration given for the backers as the ~$15K (from pledges) was available for another mold; from all appearances TPTB in Pod-land simply didn't want to spring for it just for the sake of ''two models'' folks can already buy in the revamped for NuBlitz! (2014) GP boxes.
Oddly enough TPTB at DP9, despite ample evidence to the contrary on a number of occasions, insist on thinking their player- and fan-base is composed of 13 to 18 year old folks just starting out in the world.
However, when a title's audience is primarily folks in their mid-to late 30s, 40s, and even 50s, there are lots of folks who've contributed to and run projects or whatnot, if not portions of companies - people who do know responsibility.
DP9Dave wrote: [..] Imagine being in the trenches through this making these decisions and be glad you don't have to be the one to make them.
Could explain why those not drinking the kood-aid are so easily able to see though the attempted smoke screens, hype, and double-talk to get a real read on how Dream Pod 9 operates.
JohnHwangDD wrote: ... and a new Update announces a matchmaking service!
Sweet! I like candlelit dinners, walks on the beach, and 150tv urban skirmishes. I'm hoping I find that special someone who shares the same interests!
In all seriousness, it's nice that they're doing something on that front. The pessimist in me just thinks that I'll see one lonely blip in my major US metro area if I sign up.
I'd start with coffee before committing to serious gaming.
There are 100s of HG players across the world. If you live in a major metro, there should be another player. The big question is whether you'd be willing to drive across town for a game of HG. In the greater SoCal area, that can be a big hurdle.
I've actually run into a couple people in my area who play/want to play. This might actually be useful. Is it HG only, or can I use it for my other games too?
Mmmpi wrote: I've actually run into a couple people in my area who play/want to play. This might actually be useful. Is it HG only, or can I use it for my other games too?
I just registered in my a few minutes of down time. There is a list of games to choose from (about two dozen) with most of the best sellers. For instance, 40k X-wing and Heavy Gear were on there from my personal play interests but Halo Fleet Battles was not. And, as I predicted, no opponents within the largest search paramater they allow (100 miles). I know it's early but it just reinforces my own personal experience visiting virutally (via forums) and physically most stores in that area inquiring about HG interest in the past. Eh, who knows. The guy I bought RAFM stuff from didn't know about the plastics when I mentioned them and I offered for us to try the rules out (he has a small blitz collection as well) when the final version shakes out the end. Since he lives roughly 100 miles away (the store we met at was around 70 miles away and he said he lived another 30 miles past it), it won't be a regular thing but maybe I'll get a game a season in if we both end up liking/tolerating the rules.
Just signed up for Rumbl myself. I figure I'll see how it pans out. I had no opponents for HG in 100 miles, but I didn't have any 40K opponents in the same range, and my local 40k meta is fairly active. There could be at least a few possible opponents who just don't have the service.
I wouldn't expect much else to be there. 40k players generally don't have to jump through hoops to find opponents given it's the most popular game out there according to ICV2 and has been for at least a decade. Also, the app/site/program is still in beta apparently and quite buggy so I'd guess that the few 40k players listed probably signed up primarily for another game or just accidentally stumbled onto it. I wouldn't read much into a lack of 40k players. If anything, I'd say simply ask your local players if they've even heard about the app. I'm guessing almost all will say no.
HG/DP9 though is doing a concerted active push to get folks to sign up though so a lack of player numbers in that particular case in a few months would be an accurate indicator of simply a lack of players overall. If you backed the KS, you got a message about it. If you visit their forums, you got a message about it. If they have an email mailing list, you'll probably get one there too. They're trying to organize fans in anticipation of the plastics release and I think that is a good idea at least in theory.
You can lump me in under that "not a fan of the overall design" group as well. I will say that (from the perspective of someone who has never seen the metals in person) they look very faithful to the old models. I think my least favorite part is the big cannon upgrade that looks JRPG ridiculously sized.
I've already broken open some of my blisters of Rafm stuff and am facing a quandry. Should I stay faithful to the old RPG material stats from whence these models came or make them WYSIWIG with the upcoming living rules? My first model is planned to be a Grizzly destroyer whose loadout and look has changed significantly according to the actually named new Gear Grinder web app that has apparently replaced gear garage. While the Hbzk stays the same, pretty much everything else has changed. The IRPs changed to MRPs (and were always missing from the art anyways!), the HGM somehow came back, the fragcannon reverted back to a DPG, and the spike gun up and disappeared. I have about as much chance at playing either ruleset at the moment. I'm considering a chaingun panda as the next variant but will have a similar issue there (as it apparently grew up and became a kodiak).
warboss wrote: Should I stay faithful to the old RPG material stats from whence these models came or make them WYSIWIG with the upcoming living rules?
RAFM minis are incompatible with 1/144 Blitz scale minis, so you should just build your RAFM stuff to match the pre-Blitz RPG / Tactical-era specification. You can still play them under the new-new-new-new "Blitz" rules, while using the old specs. Building to the Living Rulebook makes no sense, as it could change at any minute.
warboss wrote: Should I stay faithful to the old RPG material stats from whence these models came or make them WYSIWIG with the upcoming living rules?
RAFM minis are incompatible with 1/144 Blitz scale minis, so you should just build your RAFM stuff to match the pre-Blitz RPG / Tactical-era specification. You can still play them under the new-new-new-new "Blitz" rules, while using the old specs. Building to the Living Rulebook makes no sense, as it could change at any minute.
I decided to go with the modern specs/loadouts whenever possible. I figured I'd probably never sell these minis so I should try and "futureproof" them as much as possible in case I ever use them in a game. Ironically, they're entirely compatible with blitz scale minis in the new ruleset (although not the old Blitz rules). Since LOS and such is determined by the type and height profile, the larger size of the minis doesn't matter. The included metal bases (pics at my sig blog link or my P&M blog here) are actually not much bigger than the current plastics. Unfortunately, the larger models hang over the bases as much or even more though so I'll probably base them on 40-50mm round bases depending on the model... which is also 100% legal in the current rules. Ironically, they are compatible, lol!
I doubt anybody could have foreseen the change to the Spitting Cobra's back-mounted IF launcher, for example. I'm a little surprised you're committing to the new rules, though.
My stuff doesn't have the same issue, I believe. I just need to decide which CEF Frame loadouts I should use.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I doubt anybody could have foreseen the change to the Spitting Cobra's back-mounted IF launcher, for example. I'm a little surprised you're committing to the new rules, though.
My stuff doesn't have the same issue, I believe. I just need to decide which CEF Frame loadouts I should use.
In the end, no matter what rules I choose it's an exercise in futility without a regular opponent. It's hard enough to find anyone to play HG let alone play it with an OOP ruleset. What change for the cobra? It still has the HRP but they just call it something different iirc. It doesn't require any modelling change to stay WYSIWIG if that's your thing (and it usually is mine).
FWIW, I find that people are willing to play a first game with the HG models, just because everybody likes robot battles! Where HG falls down is the rules. Big time. I have never had so much trouble getting anyone to want to play a 2nd game of HG.
I don't know if you've seen GW's latest Battle for Vedros rules for 40k, but they have the core clocking in at 2 pages to Move, Shoot, Charge & Fight. With a 1-page Army list where each unit is effectively a playing card of rules. It's awesome. If GW can boil down 40k to 3 picture-filled pages, including both SM and Ork forces lists, then there is no reason HG couldn't radically simplify along similar lines. Heck, I basically did that with KOG Light, which is at least 2x as detailed as BfV.
Anyhow, yeah, the Cobra HRP / LAR change is a name / stats change for the existing model.
And yeah, me working on my HG stuff is mostly because I want my regular opponent to want to play with the robots, too!
JohnHwangDD wrote: FWIW, I find that people are willing to play a first game with the HG models, just because everybody likes robot battles! Where HG falls down is the rules. Big time. I have never had so much trouble getting anyone to want to play a 2nd game of HG.
In my experience, the real problem came when they saw the prices. Rules wise it was 50-50, but then again a lot of people I play with like involved systems.
JohnHwangDD wrote: The current prices on eBay and Amazon are reasonable - at half off MSRP, that is!
Mostly yes, if you live on your side of the pond. Over here, not so much . Shipping and customs charges kill any possible discount and then some.
Are there any local options? Was it any better when Wayland stocked them?
AFAIK, every store that carried it this side of the pond has stopped doing so. Having scores of outdated books a year after their printing had something to do with it, I suppose.
Back when Wayland carried the line it got quite a bit better (or at least, much more predictable) for a while, and when the stores dropped the line it got a lot better until they ran out of stocks
Nomeny wrote: Hopefully the new plastics will help address the price issue.
How much you want to bet the plastics will cost just as much as the white metal versions?
I'd say it's about 50/50 on whether they'll do the smart thing and address one of the biggest issues folks have had with the game. Their costs (both immediate as well as labor) are likely much lower (especially after KS funded the initial costs) so hopefully they'll pass it on. They've shown that they're willing to change (and the price was good during the KS for the models you get) but it's hard for such an old dog to learn so many new tricks after 20 years. *fingers crossed*
So they've decided to go with the full airbrush. Which I guess makes sense to just have SOMETHING to show, but it does highlight the fact that they're rebuilding. A "studio" paintjob needs to be better than that.
Oh, don't get me wrong, they do look good. They've got something quick that completely does the job it needs to, and that's essentially all the plastics are, too. But from here, the studio paintjobs DO need to move forward, just like everything else.
But it is certainly a good step.
Frankly, the molds don't stack up wonderfully against what's out there right now. Very good for Heavy Hear's purposes! But not impressive in the modern industry. Where they can and need to shine, then, is with paint. We'll undoubtedly see that once players get their hands on them, it just would be nice to see the studio work really, really "sell" these models.
For what they are, I don't think there's anything else like them on the market at the moment. Speaking of, the news is that the molds have arrived at the manufacturer and will go into production later this week. And...Painted Northern Army!
While some things are more obvious (like the crash diet the Cobra went on), both polar factions had some noticeable design changes. Even though I liked the Caprice aesthetic and quad walker designs, I never studied them long enough to know what they changed in the switchover to plastic. CEF got a complete redesign for their tanks in plastic but they did the same in resin/metal several times as well (both scale and designs).
I think Caprice didn't change at all, not that it needed any changes whatsoever. If there were changes, they were very minimal.
The original CEF stuff looks pretty dated, although the F6-16 is still around. I like the original rectangle hovertanks, but it appears a certain other faction has taken them (like everything else good), leaving the CEF with the newer Star Destroyer-styled hovertanks.
Pftt... that's nothing. Paxton stole the only new northern strider in 20 years (both in real life years and TN cycles!) straight out of the Northern book late playtesting stage when the Paxton book was in layout a few weeks before publication!
True. But I did catch the pattern. South has guys on horse-sized lizards? Cool. We'll give these guys bigger lizards, and then even bigger Gear-sized lizards! CEF has distinctive hovertanks and hoverAPCs? Sweet! Take them! Someone has a giant robot? Well, how about a much gianter robot with the most biggest guns ever?
Big ones! Isn't that the point of HG? Robot battles?
It's no accident that there are no infantry platoons in the KS.
(The Hussar is good, right? From what I can tell, it's HUGE with all the options, so it must be good.)
Oh, I thought you were refering to actual robots as in AI controlled models like one off world faction uses (eden?)... whichever has the KIDU stuff... and not gearstriders. Eh, everyone has gundams now except for the offworlders that get an OGRE instead. I'm not a fan of gearstriders by any stretch but they're here to stay.
Nomeny wrote: Heavy Gear is moreso a combined arms game rather than a giant robot game.
It's semantics but I disagree. I think it's more correct to say it is a giant robot game that supports the option of also playing combined arms. The main focus has always been (and IMO always should be) on gears.
Nomeny wrote: That would be finding out that Gears aren't "kings of the battlefield."
They aren't the "kings of the battlefiel" in HG either... they're just the most versatile platform in the universe fluff in that they can do almost any job but that doesn't mean there aren't more specialized things that are even better suited for those jobs. They're the swiss army knife in a violent world that also has handguns and rocks. Plus.. like bow ties and Fez's, giant robots are cool.
Nomeny wrote: Heavy Gear is moreso a combined arms game rather than a giant robot game.
Really? That's news to me, given that virtually all of the visuals are of giant robots, both the tabletop and the computer. Just because it includes things that aren't robots, doesn't make it a combined arms game.
It's like saying Car Wars is actually about motorcycles, and pedestrians and tractor trailers. And helicopters, aircraft, and tanks. Also hovercraft. And boats, if you're along the beach. Sure, you can use Car Wars for Tank battles. It'd be awful. But you could. Doesn't make it a Tank game.
And if HG is really a combined arms game, why weren't infantry in the KS? In a true combined arms game, infantry is mandatory.
Nomeny wrote: That would be finding out that Gears aren't "kings of the battlefield."
They aren't the "kings of the battlefiel" in HG either... they're just the most versatile platform in the universe fluff in that they can do almost any job but that doesn't mean there aren't more specialized things that are even better suited for those jobs. They're the swiss army knife in a violent world that also has handguns and rocks. Plus.. like bow ties and Fez's, giant robots are cool.
I really have to start paying more attention in here...soon?
I like the size/scale here, but I'm looking for something that lets you use 'robots' (Gears!), vehicles and infantry in a game.
Nomeny wrote: That would be finding out that Gears aren't "kings of the battlefield."
I'm pretty fething sure that the huge overgunned "Tank Strider" I showed earlier is the king of the battlefield and crushes any Gear you throw up against it.
And since we're playing fething semantics games, it's not a "Gear", because "Gear" isn't in its description.
warboss wrote: They aren't the "kings of the battlefiel" in HG either... they're just the most versatile platform in the universe fluff in that they can do almost any job but that doesn't mean there aren't more specialized things that are even better suited for those jobs. They're the swiss army knife in a violent world that also has handguns and rocks. Plus.. like bow ties and Fez's, giant robots are cool.
I like the size/scale here, but I'm looking for something that lets you use 'robots' (Gears!), vehicles and infantry in a game.
Is...this the game?
HG is 1-2" tall and 1/144 scale - it's a great gaming scale! Everything looks good on the battlefield, with room to maneuver, etc. HG has been consistently let down by sub-par rules being over-fiddly with an excess of hair-splitting. That said, the current beta is clearly less terrible than any of the predecessors.
For pure gameplay, CBT is probably better. But if you really like the HG models, and you really need to play by the official rules, then that's that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nomeny wrote: Oh, it's definitely a giant robot. You're just not going to do well with that giant robot if you try to do a stand-up fight with an MBT.
Alpharius wrote: You lost me there - what's CBT (and DON'T Google that term at work!)?
Also, are there infantry units in Heavy Gear too?
Classic Battletech... the great granddaddy of mech games. As for the rest... oh my. You weren't kidding.
Yup, infantry on foot, infantry in APCs, infantry on dirt bikes/atvs/lizards/motorcycles/jetbikes, alien clone infantry, cyborg infantry, etc. Plus aircraft (fixed wing and rotor), buildings, tanks, trucks, etc on top of small, medium, large and extra large robots (and not just bipedal humandoid ones but four legged as well).
Nomeny wrote: That would be finding out that Gears aren't "kings of the battlefield."
They aren't the "kings of the battlefiel" in HG either... they're just the most versatile platform in the universe fluff in that they can do almost any job but that doesn't mean there aren't more specialized things that are even better suited for those jobs. They're the swiss army knife in a violent world that also has handguns and rocks. Plus.. like bow ties and Fez's, giant robots are cool.
I really have to start paying more attention in here...soon?
I like the size/scale here, but I'm looking for something that lets you use 'robots' (Gears!), vehicles and infantry in a game.
Is...this the game?
(I do miss Space Marine/Titan Legion... )
It's not on the figurative or literal scale of Titan Legion but rather more like Dropzone commander with a focus on robots (but still all the other types of vehicles additionally). The problem traditionally with HG has been the people who make Heavy Gear. The company (DP9) has consistently over the years gone out of their way to screw over customers (stores, distributors, and gamers) for the sake of some short term sales. You're in pretty much the same boat as the rest of us in that you'll have to see if the new rules agree with you when the final version for now shakes out in a few weeks. Luckily, it should be a free download so it won't cost you anything to check them out.
Don't get too hung up about the "combined arms" thing. It's a cool feature and is usually expressed in reasonably believable ways, but with no mechs, the game doesn't exist. They are the stars and the selling-point, whether or not they're all-powerful in-game.
Besides, you can always just not take tanks and squishies in your army.
Alpharius wrote: You lost me there - what's CBT (and DON'T Google that term at work!)?
Also, are there infantry units in Heavy Gear too?
As above, Classic BattleTech; sorry about the confusion - I thought it was common knowledge among giant robot fans. Maybe we need to add "CBT" to the automatic acronym list?
If you Google "Heavy Gear NuCoal" I think you'll get a picture of every single kind of thing that exists in the HG universe. I gak you not.
warboss wrote: The problem traditionally with HG has been the people who make Heavy Gear. The company (DP9) has consistently over the years gone out of their way to screw over customers (stores, distributors, and gamers) for the sake of some short term sales.
You're in pretty much the same boat as the rest of us in that you'll have to see if the new rules agree with you when the final version for now shakes out in a few weeks. Luckily, it should be a free download so it won't cost you anything to check them out.
Of course, we're all (ex-?)GW gamers here, so corporate mercenary opportunism isn't entirely a new thing to us. And it's not like Privateer Press and the rest don't do shake the money tree, either.
The latest version of the HGBTTWGLRBB (Heavy Gear Blitz Tabletop Wargame Living Rulebook Beta) should be available on DriveThruRPG for download, and you can totally PnP playtest with GW's Space Marine models as proxies for Gears.
Yikes... That trio is also a list in order of the most broken blitz era factions! Albeit ones with cool fluff and models (and one of which I'm also a player and another I used to play). Hopefully they won't make players wince in shame with Nublitz. The cheese is still there but toned down.
And yet, none of those are in the KS... I wonder why that is. Maybe they could do another KS for "the good stuff"... You know, "top tier" forces that categorically outclass the current stuff being KS'd. Maybe restat things to make them an even easier "easy mode"?
JohnHwangDD wrote: And yet, none of those are in the KS... I wonder why that is. Maybe they could do another KS for "the good stuff"... You know, "top tier" forces that categorically outclass the current stuff being KS'd. Maybe restat things to make them an even easier "easy mode"?
Kinda like Necrons & Tau >> CSM & IG.
They're not in the kickstarter because they were never the core factions like the polar forces and the Earth invasion fleet. Part of the cheese problem was that they specifically tried to flesh out incomplete 8-10 model lines/ factions with broken rules for forced variety to match 20-30 model lines. Unfortunately, differentiating those few models with added special benefits (and no comparable disadvantages) turned out as badly as layering on the cheese sounds like it would. That's not entirely the case now but the roots of it are still there. Some of the Nucoal subfactions rules of only upsides (as opposed to polar factions getting ups AND downs), Talons getting multiple special rules for a pittance, and freebie split fire every bazooka and almost free EW bonuses for Paxton are there...just toned down half way.
Sure, yes. OTOH, if I were Tamwulf, I'd be kinda peeved that my all-conquering forces are still metal-only and not as all-conquering as before. Just look at how the ex-CSM 3.5 players behave...
Been mathhammering the HG core opposed dice mechanic:
The +/-Xd6 bonus/malus appears to be very close in effect to simply adding/subtracting +/-1 from the final total.
Numerically, it seems like one could just generate attack total + strength vs defender total + armor with fewer dice for greater clarity.
Also, is it just me, but the math suggests that it takes an average of 6 rounds of LAC / LRP shooting for a Jaeger to Destroy a Hunter? That seems a bit excessively weak.
It's hard to math hammer the new system because of the different mechanics. An extra d6 for instance on defense on a grizzly is only a 1/3 chance of a bump of +1 to your highest number... but that same extra d6 on a cheetah is a 5/6 chance of a +1 bump to your defensive result... and those calculations don't take into account the possibility that the extra die gives you your highest result and the OTHER results are used to determine +1 bumps. And those same extra 1d6 are only a 1/2 chance of an attacker bump of +1 from a hostile hunter. I don't think we can any longer make generalizations about what extra d6's mean without specificing exactly what the target and attacker are (which defeats the purpose of a generalization).
I'll have to leave it to someone better at excel that myself (haven't reguarly used it for calculations in 15+ years) but the math on your hunter on jaeger action isn't that simple. Even on an MOS of zero, you have a 50/50 chance of one point of damage. With burst, the LAC attacker is getting 3d6 to the defenders 2d6 which 50% of the time given an additional point of damage as well. If you get the target down to 2 hitpoints, it's now crippled and rolls less dice making it even more likely to do those last two boxes in one average roll of 3d6. I don't have any basis in mental mathhammer to offer up any concrete evidence/data but it feels like it's not as simple as 1d6=+1.
I would have personally preferred an even deadlier form of mechanics where an average of three shots from a like model should kill the same but it got nerfed a bit from the concept stage under Ice Raptor to the alpha version first seen.
I did Monte Carlo simulations of 1,000+ totals, along with an exact calculation of the 2d6 result. I included the calculation of the highest result along with the extra successes. That's why it bumped by +1 (roughly) rather than +0.5 for the 4+ success.
As I exactly specified above, it was Jaeger LAC / LRP (4+ Gun) v Hunter (4+ Pil) - the basic case. I did include Burst:+1d6 for the LAC, as it's built into the gun.
The typical Jaeger LAC / LRP result is just 1 Hull. If we apply -1d6 Crippled and the 50/50 for MOS:0, it makes the average kill 5:1 rather than 6:1. That's essentially the same as far as I'm concerned.
Based on the Monte Carlo simulation, statistically, it actually is as simple as +1d6 = +1 for the case I examined.
I'll muck about with other units, but I was mostly looking for anecdotal experience of whether the HG lethality is high or low. I suspect deliberately, artificially low, due to the RPG roots of not wanting to take out PCs...
I agree that lethality should be higher, and KL lethality will be dramatically higher, 2:1 vs HG's 6:1.
What is monte carlo simulation and where can I get some? I only know monte carlo for old movies, car races, gambling (I assume that one applies), and girls gone wild princesses in the 1990's.
In my case, I made a huge table of pseudo-random Xd6 rolls, that I find the result and the adders, and calculate the total. I then calculated the average of 1,000+ trials for [3+, 4+] x [3d6, 4d6, 5d6] after calculating the exact result for [3+, 4+] x [1d6, 2d6].
It's not perfect, as there is some statistical error; even if I increase to 10,000 or even 100,000 trials, the error gets smaller. However, in a game that rolls maybe 100 tests, it's close enough to characterize the results for high level analytical work.
And FWIW, going from 4+ to 3+ adds roughly 0.7 to the final total. Numerically, one might as well add +1 for the 3+ over the 4+. At least, assuming that I've made no systemic error in calculating my totals (based on the examples in the rules, I think I'm doing it correctly).
Also, adding dice has the Ork effect, where the results get more and more consistent, and therefore predictable. Rolling 5d6 for a 3+ skill gives a vastly more consistent total than rolling 3d6 for a 4+ skill.
My observation is simply that, for the result that the Pod is getting, the HGB mechanics may be unnecessarily complex.
I've been cheating on you, John. Despite your fetching profile pic, I've been discussing statistics with another gearhead behind your back.
Here's an interesting dice roller made up by Steve on the official forums. I've been arguing for a buff to rifles and he posted his roller as well as an explanation of how to enter the data and read the output. I don't have the know how to check his programming but it's nice to crunch some numbers.
Thanks for the pointer. I have no idea as to the specifics going on in that thread, as I don't think any of my models have Rifles.
However, it is relevant that the typical damage ranges from 0.5 up to 1.2 - that bit is consistent with the numbers I was getting, and reinforces the notion that we are looking at 5-7 shooting attempts to destroy an enemy gear.
According to his roller, a hunter at optimum range firing with an LAC at another jaeger in the open does an average of 1.47 damage with a 64.4% chance of doing any damage. On average, it should take it 4 turns to destroy its twin. The LRP is roughly the same, whiffing a bit more often but doing a bit more damage on average... and has the added benefit of AE 4" to hit multiple targets. This is assuming that a weapon with the traits ballistic and indirect is not forced to use indirect but can instead just fire with ballistic. From my reading of the rules, that is the case just like in old blitz (that you can fire some indirect weapons directly). I wasn't expecting that.
Hm. I did a rerun of 1,000x Jagers shooting (4+) LAC (3d6) shooting at Hunters (4+ 2d6), incorporating both MOS(0=0.5) and max(6) damage, and got an average 1.45 damage.
That's essentially similar to his 1.47 calculation, so it's a nice cross check. Mechanically, this is far more involved than what 40k, etc. require for resolution.
Wow the paint really, uh... really highlights the... the uh... Well, the terribleness of the Mamba and the Iguana. And their hilarious, disjointed monkeyarms. I do really like the Jager, though.
warboss wrote: It makes me smile a little to see that the brawler mamba uses the same underhanded grenade launcher position as I converted mine into years ago.
That's... the way it is supposed to go, that one
And holy gak, yeah, I didn't really notice the tiny hands. They've gone back to the old tac minis in that regard, and then some. Also... is it me or the Mamba's back feet are waaaaaay too long?
JohnHwangDD wrote: I think there's a reason why they no longer show the plastics alongside the metals.
Heh, probably for the better. For them. Anyways, if they are cheap, they are good enough to start with.
What "cheap" means in DP9ese remains to be seen, though. As much as it remains to be seen how many stores can they convince to carry their range, given their past history with gaking over stores.
Why are we talking about milk and cows? Thought this was a 
)
